American Federation of Teachers Convention Resolution on Merit Rating

Hide Document

I.



INTRODUCTION


Our American school system is an expression:of the value we
hold for education for-all who wish to avail themselves of it,
and it provides a social process of opportunity for all children.
But .public ~-and governmental --concern has often been like a
roller coaster ride: sudden ascents and even more rapid declines.
Too often we as a people have failed to adequately finance our
schools, then criticized them for not training students as we

hoped. '\'1e have blamed our schools for not doing enough, while
blaxning them equally for trying to do too much. \'1here there is
illiteracy, it is the school which is to blame. vfuere there is
social ~nrest, youth unemployment, drug and alcohol abuse, we

tend to say that it is the fault of the school.

We are one of the leac.1ing nations in agricultural production,
manufacturing, high technology, medicine, the arts, banking and
other fields, yet the schools are not appropriately accorded
their share of the credit for these achievements. We should do
more to applaud our successes. Outstanding pe~formances in
mathematics in classrooms from Montgomery County, Maryland, to
East Los Angeles, California, do not make headlines, nor does the
mainstreaming of handicapped students. We too easily ignore the
increased integration of student bodies in colleges and universities',
and we do not relate that to what has been good in our
elementary and secondary schools. l-'1e tend to concentrate our
attention on the failures.

'/---------..-r';"',---~--....-.,-~---------



Page Two

But there can be no denying that there are serious problems,
and if we fail to confront those problems we shall imperil the
future economy and security of this country. Those problems vary
from homes that do not encourage study to a curriculum that is
not adequate in its challenge. But the one essential ingredient
for a superior equcational opportunity is a talented, dedicated
teacher. Yet we pay teachers less than most professionals.

AVERAGE SALARY OF ErvlPLOYEES
IN SELECTED WHITE COLLAR OCCUPATIONS
IN PRIVATE ESTABLISHMENTS, HARCH 1982

Average Occupational Class Avg.
Occupation Annual Salary Entry to Top Level

Accountant $26,306 $18,260-48,549
Attorney-Salaried 43,249 25,162-76,202
Programmers/Analysts 24,809 17,535-35,430
.Chemist 32,844 19,640-53,658
Engineer 34,745 23,622-62,494
Drafters 19,816 11,739-25,909'
Computer Operators 16,231 11,896-23,267
Secretary 16,539 14,000-21,546
Typists 11,·915 10,893-13,723
Teachers 18,945 12,966-23,437


Source·: Calculations based on \1hite Collar Salaries, March 1982,

U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
/

". .~..: t· ."

, *">


J


Page Three

Moreover, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching recently reported that the percentage of public elementary

;

and secondary school expenditures for teaching have dropped from

49 percent to 41 percent in the last ten years. In the 1973-74

school year, the United States spent $43.7 billion on instruction

in the public schools: $21.4 billion went to teacher salaries.

Last year public school expenditures for the nation added up to

$106 billion. Teacher salaries made up $43.9 billion of the

total. ''ihile education expendit:-ures have gone up, the proportion

of the money spent on teacher salaries has fallen, and the

proportion of the instructional dollar earmarked for other ser


vices and ~ersonnel has increased. '

What statement does our nation make when podiatrists are
required to study lenger, face mu~h more vigorous career entrance
tests, and are paid considerably more than teachers? \fuat statement
do we make when we offer teachers few incentives and
inadequate compensation but constantly increase their responsibilities?
What statement does our nation make when we fail to
convey the simple message to students, their parents and teachers
that education is important?

School administrators and boards of education must help
create an atmosphere in which education can thrive and learning is
encouraged and respected. That:means fewer excuses to cut classes,
fewer interruptions by public address systems and less scheduling
of events that reduce classroom time. Teachers sense that a

"

school administration 'believes their role is, important not only
with the salary level offered, but also when they feel the "little"

actions by a school administratipn support the teachers' activities

and educational endeavors.


Page Four

Education is an opportunity, but it is an opportunity which
requires partnership --among levels of government, the community,
parents, teachers and students. If we are "a nation at risk" as
stated in the recent National Commission on Excellence in Education
report and we share their serious concerns about educational
deficiencies then the risk is posed not only by educational
systems, but by this nation walking the path of indifference,
lack of commitment and inadequate funding. However, there is
today substantial evidence that the American public wants to
improve our schools and that they are willing to pay the bill.

BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS

On June 17, 1983, Representative Carl Perkins, Chairman
of the Education and Labor Committee of the House of Representatives,
appointed a Task Force on Merit Pay to review the issue of
merit pay for educators and issue a report. The Task Force membership
is both independent and bipartisan, with seventeen of the
twenty-one members from the private sector. Those appointed were:

U. S. Rep. Paul Simon, Chairman, D-Ill.
U. S. Rep. William F. Goodling, Vice-Chairman, R-Pa.
U. S. Rep. E. Thomas Coleman, R-Mo.
U. S. Rep. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.
LeRoy Hay, 1983 National Teacher of the Year, Manchester, Conn.
Jaime Escalante, Mathematics Teacher, Los Angeles, Calif.

State Senator Robert Martin, Kentucky
Former Governor Albert Quie, Hinnesota


Ernest
Boyer, President, Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching
Anne F1Gwers, President, American Association of Colleges
of Teacher Education

..: -..... ••J ......


Page Five

Elaine Stienkemeyer, President, National P.T.A.

Mary Hatwood Futrell, President, National Education
Association
Albert Shanker, President, American Federation of Teachers

James Sanders, President,
Illinois School Boards
Association

Raymond Barber, Superintendent.of Public. Instruction,
Commonwealth of Kentucky
Leslie R. Fisher, Superintendent of Public Instruction,
State of Oklahoma
Floretta McKenzie, Superintendent, District of Columbia
Public Schools
Wilson Riles, Former Superintendent of Public Instruction,
State of California

Frank Tracy, Principal,
High Point High School,
Beltsville, Maryland


Paul ~almon, Executive Director,
American Association of
School Administrators

Robert L. Smith, Executive Director,
Council for American
Private Education

The Task Force heard witnesses from three major commissions

on education which had recently issued reports, in addition to

receiving testimony from Governors, State Legislators, deans of

schools of education, students, teachers, principals and school

board members.

Witnesses who came before the Task Force agreed that our

-'--1'

educational system is confronting a crisis in the number of
high quality teachers entering and remaining in the profession.
Low salaries for elementary and secondary school teachers have
always been the-dominant patter~ of compensation in this nation,
but the problem is now worsening. Women and minorities serving
in the field of teaching have provided a form of ·controlled,

Pi


Page Six

in-kind subsidy to public education. However, expanding oppor


tunities for women and minorities in other professions have

decreased this traditional pool of teacher candidates.

Students are not being encouraged to become teachers. Far
too often the ablest young people feel challenged by opportunities
in law, medicine and engineering rather than teaching.
Academic scores
\
for education majors, measured by college entrance
examinations and grade point averages, show a marked decline
over the l~st decade. Although test scores measure talent, they
cannot gauge qualities such as dedication and love for children.
But it is probable that these latter qualities are present in the
same numbers among students with high test scores as among students
with low test scores. The fact that some of these qualities are
difficult to measure should not be used to camouflage a major
educational problem in the nation. Too often we are not attracting

·the finest students to teaching,. and too often we are not

keeping the finest teachers. These generalized truths, however,

should not detract from another reality: we are still attracting

and keeping many fine teachers. They deserve our gratitude, and

they deserve it in more concrete terms than they are now receiving

it.

Teachers should not be the sole focus of questions about the
quality of education. Social problems, such as drug and alcohol
abuse, have disrupted the education process. Changing family
patterns have created additional problems for the educational
system. Lower college admission standards have led to reduced
high school graduation requirements. The Carnegie Foundation for


the Advancement of T.eaching has found that electives and .courses

that demand too little of students have multiplied, while the

number of courses required for all students has declined and

attendance at the more academically rigorous classes has fallen.

A host of other things ·could be mentioned.

Yet the key educational role played by teachers suggests
that the most rapid improvement in education may be made by
upgrading that profession. In recent months, policy makers and
educators have increased their interest in merit pay as one
method to attract and retain the most able teachers.

'\

EXISTING OR PROPOSED MERIT PAY OR CAREER LADDER PLANS

Existing or proposed plans of performance-based pay take two
general forms: merit pay and a structured advance system, somet~
mes called the career ladder approach.

Merit pay is a system that rewards exemplary teaching by
either a bonus or an increased annual salary. The career ladder
system creates levels of teachers from apprentice teacher
through several intermediate steps to the highest level of master
teacher. Different salaries and responsibilities are associated
with each step on the career ladder.

There are several examples of merit payor master teacher
plans now being debated in various state legislatures. Local
school districts in Houston, Texas~ Lower Dauphin, Pennsylvania~
and Seiling, Oklahoma; and many others have implemented plans
which follow the basic patterns. Many private schools have used
merit pay plans for decades.

-: .



Page Eight
Merit paVe This reward system attempts to base salary on

performance. The performance gauged may be by the individual teacher,
an individual classroom, or meeting school-wide or district-wide goals.
For example, an individual teacher may meet performance standards
of increased reading ability in the classroom and receive merit
pay. A school building of grades K-6 may see a mUlti-class
increase ih standardized scores for students and all teachers in
that building may be rewarded. A school district may set system-
wide goals such as general levels of increased competency in
reading and writing, access for all students and increased attendance
for teachers and students. Teachers fulfilling these
system-wide goals would receive merit pay.

Merit pay defines the reward for performance in dollar
terms, although this may include sabbaticals, tu~tion· assistance
or other bonuses.

Under merit pay systems, there often is no sustained pay
increase, although teach~rs may be eligible each year. There is
no increase in duties per ~, nor is a "merit" teacher differentiated
from other teachers through special recognition.

~Career Ladder System. This system creates tiers from
entrY level through master teacher with varying pay and responsibilities
at each level. The designation of master teacher is
judged by panels composed of teachers, administrators, school
board members and parents or variations of this combination.
The master teacher has an extended contract, along with a substantial
salary differential from lower levels of teachers. A
master teacher might have responsiblities which include developing
curriculum, aiding other teacher~ in the classroom and serving
on panels to evaluate others to be master teachers.


. ":-.


. Page Nine

An example of a career ladder would be:

*
Apprentice Teacher --Must meet all state requirements. for
initial certification and hold degree from an accr~dited
college or university. Entry-level salary of at least
$15,000. '
*
Professional Teacher --fully certified teacher with five
years' experience and at least four positive, annual evaluations
and some in-service training or postgraduate course work.
Base Fifth Year Salary $20,000.
*
Senior Teacher --certified teacher, Master's degree in
discipline taught or area of concentration, and at least
8 of ~O positive annual evaluations. Base Tenth Year
Salary $30,000. *
Master Teacher --certified teacher, 'best practice'
demonstrated, additional study beyond Master's degree,
more than ten years of consistently positive evaluations,
willing to accept in-service or summer-training responsibility
for other teachers. Base Pay afte'r Tenth Year
when requirements met $35,000. Minimum Annual Bonus for
continuing positive evaluations and in-service contribution
$10,000.
The experience of proposed and existing systems merit pay raises

many
questions that must be carefully examined, including:

What
criteria are to be used to determine merit?

*

*
Who is to establish and judge merit? How are teachers
to be involved in the e,stablishment of a merit payor
structured elevation plan?
What
appeal mechanism is included in the process?

*
.
,

*
Can these plans address other problems in the classroom
and school system?
Polls show that both the public and educators are willing

to move ahead with some form of performance-based pay, and we

applaud that attitude, but no one should be deceived that its

achievement is easy. Experience suggests that it is not. There

is no plan that is acceptable to all. But the fact that there

are problems should not cause immediate rejection of the idea .

. "..SA¥]. ,!14,
. .4

..

. .". ~ ..


Page Ten'

RECOMMENDATIONS


Performance-based pay as a method to elevate the teaching
profession cannot be viewed in isolation. Tho'se who, view merit
pay as some easy, inexpensive, painless method of solving the
nation's education problems are not realistic. Merit pay is but
one of many pieces in a puzzle. It can be an important piece(
but it is neither inexpensive nor easy to achieve, and other
pieces of the puzzle must be put into place also. In some school
districts perf'orrnance-based pay will result in an improved educational
product, and an ability to attract and keep high quality
teachers; in other school districts, for a variety of reasons, it

, ,

may not work. From our deliberations, this Task Force has determined
that the question the n<:,-tion must face is not, simply how to
implement performance-based pay for educators but how we can lift
the standards of instruction in the nation.

We recommend:

1. School districts and states must raise the basic pay of
teachers. Without this, other steps will have limited impact.
We recognize this is easier to recommend than to achieve, but
. I

it is an essential action.

2. The ~of starting teachers ~receive immediate
attention. 'Higher 12!:Y. for beginning teachers should be accompanied
by higher state-imposed standards for those entering the profession:
Prospective teachers should pass an examination on
their subject matter as a necessary, but not sufficient condition
of employment.
, ,

. ...: .....:~ . ,"

~


Page Eleven

3. Despite mixed and inconclusive results with performance-
based pay in the private sector and in education, we support and
encourage experiments with performance-based pay. States, such
as Tennessee, California, Florida, and Oklahoma; which appear to
be on the verge of major experiments, should share their experience
with others. The Department of Education, perhaps through the
National Institute of Education, should evaluate the experience
of states and school districts and disseminate its information
widely.
The opportunity for economic improvement and professional
advancement for a teacher should not be dependent on moving into
school administration. A superior teacher should be able to
receive a superior salary. No state pays a good teacher more


-than an average or a poor teacher. Polls have shown that the
public regards this fact as an impediment to improving teacher
performance.

Experiments in performance-based pay should include the
following features:


A. Involve teachers and administrators as well as the
community in establishing the evaluation criteria and the benefits
-....·4 ...

of a merit pay plan. Teachers, school administrators and boards
of education must be firmly committed to spend the time and
energy to develop and implement a plan' if it is to be successful •


.•..4 ..

,J \ .•.• , .. , E


-......, ...;-..


Page Twelve

B. In developing criteria and procedures to be used in
merit pay systems, special care should be taken to avoid abuses
that would grant rewards for reasons other than outstanding
teacher performance.
C. All teachers participating in such programs should be
aff6rded periodi~ review. Incentives should be built in for
teachers to continue self-improvement.
D. Once established, the system should be subject to periodic
review for refinement, improvement or abandonment.
E. In establishing some form of performance-based pay, a
school district should recognize the needs and contributions
of competent teachers who do not fall into a superior category.
These teachers are the lifeblood of the school system.
4. College and university presidents should consider the level
of institutional support given to their departments of education
and increase the percentage of the budget that is directed to
teacher education. Departments of education should be encouraged
to assess their programs and to consider increasing entrance
st~ndards and developing more rigorous course work requirements
for students. Colleges and universities should develop strategies
to build more effective elementary and secondary school-college
.

partnerships. The federal government should assist collegiate
departments of education to upgrade programs, and to build and
enhance the higher education and K-12 relationship.

ne , ._ '. ""
.ji.,....

Page Thirteen

5. School districts should devote at least three percent of
their budget to faculty growth and development.

This can take any number of avenu'es, from guest lectures, to
bringing in outstanding teachers from other areas for evaluation
(which should be ~ore than judgment: it should help a teacher
improve) to an annual award of an opportunity to travel or study
abroad for an outstanding teacher in each school building, perhaps
selected by his or her peers.

6. ~federal government should inaugurate ~ expansion of
the summer institutes and other inservice training opportunities
for educators that are ~part of the science-math-foreign
language bills pending in the Senate ~passed by the House.
Such institutes should be availabl~ for approximately 200,000 of
elementary and secondary school teachers each year beginning with
the summer of 1985. The institutes would include advanced
instruction in subject matter, updating teaching techniques and
evaluating teacher performance.
7. School districts should institute a system of sabbatical
leaves for educators.
This should include encouragement for further study, research
and foreign study and travel. / .
Select~on should be based on
objective criteria.

8. ~ scholarship program available to the brightest high
school graduates should be inaugurated by the federal government.
Such a program should be available regardless of need, requiring
the student who accepts the scholarship --at perhaps $5,000 a
year --to teach for two years for each year of scholarship ,help,
t i

. ~.

....-..-..


Page Fourteen

or to repay the scholarship at prevailihg interest rates if
another field is chosen. If 10,000 sch"olarships were made
available --twenty-three in each congressional district --to
the top five percent of a high school graduating class, the cost

would be $50 million per year at the most, a modest investment

which would payoff many times over.

9~ A'talented teacher fellowship program should be
inauqurated by the federal government, to begin in 1985. Each
year teachers in each congressional district would be selected
by a process similar to selection of "Teacher of the Year" or
by a national selection board, to be awarded a year's salary and
a one-year"le~ve of absence from their local school district, for
additional study, research or travel than can be demonstrated to
improve the teaching strengths of the individual or the teaching
strength of others. The award should be provided with the stipulation
that the awardee will return to the same school to teach
for at least two years following the one-year fellowship.

10. School districts should regularly and' carefully evaluate
administrative personnel. Special attention should be paid to
principals. School after school has discovered that a change in
principal can result in either marked improvement or marked
deterioration of the educational product and the atmosphere in
which teachers must work.
11. Experimentation in organizational styles for school
districts and schools should be undertaken to improve the work
environment for teachers. School officials can call on the
combined intelligence and experience of business and industry,
and, where appropriate, develop business-school partnerships
4.P 4£¥Ti1
J. , . ?4. q ~ i .. , _~

Page Fifteen

for improving school management. Experiments could include
restructuring the supervision of teachers, introducing participatory
management and adapting quality circles and other
methods used in industry to increase productivity.

12. "Action must be taken to address school discipline and violence
problems. One important st~p is the establishment of alternative
education settings for chronically disruptive or violent children.
Students who consistently act out in the regular classroom not
only fail to learn, but also are an impediment to the education
of all other children.
13. Federal research agencies and bodies should make grants to
several independent, educational research organizations ~
individuals for the purpose of developing objective criteria and
teacher performance evaluation models ~could be used to
implement performance-based pay systems. Results from such
research should be made available to states or local school
districts to assist them in their development of performancebased
pay systems.
The national self-examination of education that is now taking
place should be more than a fad, and if it is sustained with the
type of follow-through suggested in this report, the nation will
be better, both in the quality of its life and in its economy.
The recommendations in this report will result in modest increases
in expenditures by federal, state and local resources, but is an
increment that will be repaid many times over, both economically
and culturally. State leaders at all levels are involved in a

,l '" pc.



! I ~

Page Sixteen

serious examination of their educational programs. We believe

that all states and local school districts, as well as educational

organizations and the federal government,should join in the

search for improvement, a search that inevitably leads to the

educators who have contributed so much, who deserve our gratitude,

and whose concrete problems must be addressed in concrete terms.

~------.-----



· r-'-' ._.',
!
i'
California Florida Tennessee

DESIGNATION Mentor Teachers Master Teachers Apprentice Teachers,
and Assoc iate Professional Teachers,
Master Teachers. Senior Teachers, and
Master Teachers.
NUMBER 5% as mentor teachers No 1imit 15% as master teachers
ELIGIBLE -25% as senior teachers
SUPPLEMENT $4,000 per mentor Not specified $1,000 for professional
AMOUNT $2,000 for senior--10 mo.
$4,000 for senior--11 mo.
$3,000 for master--10 mo.
$5,000 for master--ll mo.
$7,000 for master--12 mo.
EVALUATION Local district Local district prinOn-
site observations by
staff cipal and teacher plus
outsider with expertise
master teac~ers. ..
in the teacher's area.
EXPERIENCE "Recent experience" For associate master For the professional
REQUIREteachers--
four years, teacher, three years as
MENTS at least two in Floran
apprentice teacher; for
ida; for master teachthe
senior teacher, three
ers--seven years, at years as a professional
least five in Florida, teacher; and for the
and three as an assocmaster
teacher, five years
iate master teacher. as'a senior teacher.
CERIIFICAPermanent
status Professional service Professional certificate
TION certificate, or continuing
contract.
SELECTION Local school State Commissioner of State Master Teacher
PROCESS board Education after transCommission
mission of information
by local school board.
TERM OF 3 years 3 years 5 years
DES IGNATION
REPSONSIMentor
teachers are No responsibilities Master teachers would be
BILITIES not to evaluate other are stipulated in the involved in the evaluation
teachers, but are to legislation. a f other teachers, assist
assist other teachers other teachers, and develop
and work with curriccurriculum
materials.
ulum development.
COST Approximately Specific amount not $116,000,000 ($138 pIp)
$45,000,000 available, but
($12 pIp) $80,000,000 approp


riated for this progr&a

and extended day program-.

($53 pIp) 09/12/83


i

-i


AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS
CONVENTION RESOLUTION


WlIEltEA.S, there is a grOwingtandency on the part
of school boa.rds to include "merit. rat1ng~'
factors in detarmin1nga ta&cher's aalary, and

WlIEltEA.S, rating plans are, of.nElC8881ty, based on
sUDjectivejudgmenta .into wh1ch persona.l1t1es
and. Pressuns a.r9 certa1n to enter, and

WlIEltEA.S, "merit;· rat11lg" weakens taaaher
tenure, threatens academic fl'ged.o~ and. places.
the teacher'in the impotent: p081t1on of bargainmg.
indiV1duaJly with,a4m1D1strat1on: and

wa H:8.EAS, "merit ra.t1ng" plans Cl'eate a. faJ.se'
saJ.a.ry' rna"dmum. wb.1ch few ta&chers will evera.
ttain, and

WlIEltEA.S~ "merit rat1ng" lla.s fa.:iled to mea.sur&'
and improve the quality of instruct10n in the'
alaaaroom, and, .

WlIEltEA.S, "merit rating" has· greatly da.ma.ged
the m~eof ta&ching personnel, and. .

WlIEltEA.S, "merit rat11lg" adversely a.f!ecta the
proteS81ona.l rels.t1onsh1p between taa.ahers and
administrators;

, .

.USOLVlm, thai Ule ~oppose Ule use of "merit
l'at.:ing" in au s.alar.1 sched.uIu, and
USOliVED, thai the .&n auppor1 the principle of a·
I~a.aluy JChe4u1e baHc:t aD. b'aining I.D4
~ce,an4'

DSOL'OD, thai She, Aft ~~'condemn au
plana. which b.ue taachel's' aaJariu on "merit
raiUlg." (1968)

~1E.R IT RATHIG

SIN~LE-SALARY SCl-IEDULE

Hide Document