Education
DCPS needs more than money to attract top teachers
DC Council Chairman Kwame Brown plans to draft a bill that focuses on recruiting teachers to teach in high-poverty, low-performing schools. However, the incentives he proposes may not be enough to recruit highly effective teachers to work in these schools.
Photo by IntangibleArts on Flickr.
Past research on state incentive programs suggests that monetary incentives don't actually do enough to recruit and retain good teachers in high-poverty schools.
In addition to monetary incentives to recruit teachers to low performing schools, districts must also motivate effective teachers to stay in these schools through other factors like strong school leadership, access to high-quality professional development, career mobility, and comprehensive induction for new teachers.
On October 20, DC Council Chairman Kwame Brown announced that he was drafting a bill focused on recruiting effective teachers to work in under-performing schools. While he plans to examine the incentives other states have used, he has suggested that he is already considering several specific incentives.
They include homebuying assistance, tax credits, loan repayments, and the removal of teacher evaluations under IMPACT. Currently, IMPACT rewards highly effective teachers at high poverty schools with a $10,000 bonus.
The most recent IMPACT evaluation report, which identified 663 highly effective teachers, demonstrates the urgency of increasing the number of effective teachers in low-performing schools. While 135 highly effective teachers work in Ward 3 schools, only 71 highly effective teachers work in schools in both Wards 7 and 8.
While Kwame Brown should focus on recruiting teachers to work especially in high-poverty schools, he should also consider ways to motivate these teachers to stay in these schools for more than a year. He could focus on improving working conditions by recruiting principals who support their teachers by providing professional development opportunities as well as opportunities for collaboration among teachers and other school leaders. These schools could also have an incentive program to recruit qualified administrative staff and paraprofessionals who can assist teachers in completing paperwork and working with students who require additional support.
In order to retain new teachers that decide to work in high-poverty schools, Brown should implement an induction program for new urban teachers that complements the New Teacher Orientation and the mentoring support that DCPS currently offers. This induction program could provide additional support these new teachers on issues specific to high-poverty schools.
Chairman Brown's bill, however, should not include waiving annual evaluations under IMPACT as an incentive. Waiving IMPACT may motivate even those teachers deemed as highly effective to work in higher poverty schools since 50% of the IMPACT evaluation is based on student achievement. Nevertheless, IMPACT's value-added approach focuses on measuring a teacher's true impact on student learning by taking other factors that may lead to poor student achievement into account.
Additionally, IMPACT ensures that all DCPS teachers will not only be observed by both their principal and a master educator, but will also have to opportunity to debrief with them and discuss how to improve their practice. As Chancellor Henderson told Washington Post reporter Bill Turque, "even highly effective teachers want and need feedback [in order] to improve and refine their practice." Receiving this feedback is especially important for the highly effective teachers who are in their first few years of working with a different student population.
Research also demonstrates that in order for professional development to be effective, it must be offered regularly, occur in the school where the teacher works, and be driven by clear goals, data, and teacher input. The 5 classroom observations that are part of IMPACT establish that all teachers in DCPS will have access to effective professional development and that the professional development will meet the needs of each teacher, rather than being a one-size-fits-all workshop.
Finally, it isn't clear whether or how highly effective teachers in high-poverty schools would be recognized for their successes if IMPACT is waived. Currently, IMPACT gives highly effective teachers in all DCPS schools the opportunity to be recognized for their work and their students' achievement by being invited to district leadership events at DCPS and by being recognized at A Standing Ovation for DC Teachers gala and the Rubenstein Awards for Highly Effective Teaching. Under IMPACT, highly effective teachers are also "eligible for performance bonuses of up to $25,000. Repeat highly effective staff members are eligible for base salary increases of up to $20,000, in addition to the annual bonuses."
While monetary incentives are important to recruiting highperforming teachers to underperforming schools, Chairman Brown must consider incentives that focus on improving working conditions to retain these teachers in high-poverty schools. IMPACT plays a role in better working conditions for teachers by ensuring high quality professional development for all teachers and by publicly recognizing teachers who are deemed highly effective.
 | Celine Tobal works in the field of education where she focuses on improving educational outcomes for all students and is pursuing an MBA at George Washington University. She has an Ed.M in Education Policy and Management from Harvard Graduate School of Education and a B.A from Haverford College.   |
Comments
- Successful speed cameras require fair speed limits
- VDOT ignores own data, pushes widening I-66
- DC's divide need not be black and white
- Preservationists ask to shrink 3rd Church replacement
- Live chat: Matt Yglesias, Wednesday at noon
- Half-hour Metro headways are not acceptable
- "Degree density" maps show region's east-west divide
by Tyro on Nov 8, 2011 10:27 am
They include homebuying assistance, tax credits, loan repayments, and the removal of teacher evaluations under IMPACT. Currently, IMPACT rewards highly effective teachers at high poverty schools with a $10,000 bonus.
Ok, so if I understand this correctly, Brown's goal is to try to attract more "effective" teachers to poorly performing high-poverty schools. And to do this, he wants to give housing assistance (great idea), tax credits, loan repayments (sounds good), and "removal of teacher evaluations."
So, to summarize, the main tools we're going to use to attract effective teachers are: "economic incentive A", "economic incentive B", "economic incentive C", and "stop bothering to evaluate their effectiveness."
Also, I've decided to go on a diet by blotting out all the nutritional information from any food in my pantry. After all, accurate information is only an obstacle to healthy eating.
by oboe on Nov 8, 2011 10:55 am
So, to summarize, the main tools we're going to use to attract effective teachers are: "economic incentive A", "economic incentive B", "economic incentive C", and "stop bothering to evaluate their effectiveness."
Well..sorta.
The only thing seemingly "locked" about his idea is the
"economic" incentives and not the evaluation portion. From looking at it, Brown proposed "temporarily" removing the evaluations and was open to limiting it's scope only to middle schools since they are the lowest performing. In exploring all possibilities for increasing the percentage of HE teachers, I don't think the temporary moratorium is the worst thing they can do.
by HogWash on Nov 8, 2011 11:26 am
by Fitz on Nov 8, 2011 12:07 pm
The city should find some better functioning principals and administrators before trying to run and pay everyone more.
by stinkykoala on Nov 8, 2011 12:51 pm
Other suggestions:
Teachers who teach grades that get the standardized tests (3, 5, 8 & 11 I think?) are graded on the outcomes of those tests. The other grade teachers aren't, b/c tests aren't given in their grades. The test-grade teachers should get paid more for the extra effort and extra stress.
Get rid of mandatory PD. Offer PD that teachers can choose, like tuition to grad courses in a relevant field, fees to conferences, or worshops of their choosing. Mandatory PD is universally hated among teachers (in my experience) primarily b/c they don't feel they get anything useful out of it and it interferes with their job: preparing for the classroom, teaching and grading.
Get rid of mandatory busy-work that has nothing to do with teaching but is designed only to somehow benefit admin. i don't mean curriculum development, classroom plans and grades. I mean BS that is not directly related to teaching but reports "what you did, what you plan to do" etc. so admin can look at it or file it. theres no way someone in admin reads all those reports. If teachers are graded on student outcomes then focus on that and quit taking time away from teaching.
Get rid of mandatory meetings that take place during teachers' scheduled planning time. the counter-productivity of this type of scheduling should be obvious yet it happens all over. This includes mandatory recess and lunchroom supervising. Again, If teachers are graded on student outcomes then focus on that and quit taking time away from teaching. Hire someone to supervise recess and lunchroom.
Less pressure on principles for pushing kids through would help teachers retain kids for another year if the teacher thinks the kid needs it. Its absolutely nonsensical that a teacher should adivise a kid repeat a grade and the principle deny it.
Finally, add teacher aides and reduce class size, reduce class size, reduce class size.
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 1:00 pm
The city should find some better functioning principals and administrators before trying to run and pay everyone more.
Agreed. Admin has a lot to do with this either requiring too much mandatory BS not related to teaching (described above) or being absent.
Of course some schools have great principles whom the teachers love. In general though I think there's too much antagonism between teachers and principles. I know several DCPS teachers who quit b/c of being fed up with admin, not b/c of the kids or pay.
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 1:14 pm
Finally, add teacher aides and reduce class size, reduce class size, reduce class size.
While teachers may like that idea, does it benefit the students? Not necessarily:
In 1999, Stanford economist Eric Hanushek reported that 277 econometric studies of student performance conducted through 1994 had examined the impact of class size or student-teacher ratios on achievement. Of those, just 15 percent found statistically significant positive effects, and 13 percent found statistically significant negative effects.
http://www.aei.org/outlook/27449
by Fitz on Nov 8, 2011 1:21 pm
I dont recall the lower threshhold number. But IIRC the upper 25-35 was reported. I thinks thats one reason why you see admin piling 35 kids into classrooms.
Also, thats not to say there is NO diff between 25-35 just that the proportion of "better achieving' is not significant. Non-significance in a statistical test should not always be interprested not-important clinically (where clinically in this case is student achievment)
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 1:31 pm
I agree that incentives for teachers to stay at new schools should go beyond the loss of their housing/loan benefits should they leave before a certain time, to include feedback and a supportive school environment. As it is, higher DCPS principal salaries may help encourage the recruitment of capable school leadership at some of these troubled schools.
by DCster on Nov 8, 2011 1:33 pm
Stink/Tina, what you've written is pretty much what we've heard from Teachers around the country during 2010's "who can most bash teachers" contest - where Rhee (her supporters included) and MSNBC won that round.
But the constant refrain from leaders with an interest in teachers was that they needed support and lots of it. Unfortunately, public school performance was invariably tied to its charter school counterpart. This was unfair if for no other reason than the abilities of charter schools to hold their students/parents accountable in ways that traditional public schools aren't allowed.
Believe it or not, I entertained the idea of teaching in DCPS from 2008-2010 but this last election cycle pretty much soured me on that.
by HogWash on Nov 8, 2011 1:47 pm
by HogWash on Nov 8, 2011 1:51 pm
Then I would understand why an administrator would want to have 35 students per classroom instead of 25. Given the limited resources I don't think we'll be seeing 15 students per classroom any time soon.
@HogWash,
Re: evaluations. That would make sense then. I find it hard to believe that performance evals would be ditched permanently.
Re: teachers-per-student research. Updated research could show differing conclusions. I used that resource because I recall reading it recently.
by Fitz on Nov 8, 2011 2:19 pm
by LAWC on Nov 8, 2011 2:30 pm
Yes. But think of it from the teachers' perspective and from the perspective of incentives that retain teachers. Packing the max number of students some research says is ok w/o regard to the clinical importance to students and teachers is a bit like treating both students and teachers as widgets, isn't it? Why would you want to work for someone/some organization that treats you like that?
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 2:30 pm
If there were the right systems of support in place, the exact dollar amount wouldn't matter.
E.g., even the hiring process is completely wacked, with the school system not able to make offers til right around when school starts, by which time most teachers in demand have already been hired elsewhere.
by Richard Layman on Nov 8, 2011 2:50 pm
Not to pick on HogWash, but since I need a hook to hang one of my pet peeves on, here goes.
This is an excellent example of why the teaching profession needs to be professionalized. The teacher's role is one that's absolutely critical to both addressing socioeconomic inequalities and US competitiveness, and yet I'm trying to think of any other respected profession where people talk about it as though they were volunteering at a soup kitchen.
"You know, a couple of years ago, I toyed with the idea of becoming a cardiothoracic surgeon, but after this whole Obamacare thing passed, I thought, 'You know what? To Hell with that!'"
It was fashionable a few months ago to compare the US teaching profession with that of places like South Korea and Singapore where teachers are paid a ton of money, and have a lot of prestige as well (in Finland, generally there's less money but greater respect). But what usually gets dropped from the discussion is how incredibly difficult the process of becoming a teacher is. Generally speaking these people are the academic superstars among their peers:
Consider three other countries renowned for their educational performance: Singapore, South Korea and Finland. In each country, teachers are drawn from the top third of their cohort, are hugely respected and are paid well (although that’s less true in Finland). In South Korea and Singapore, teachers on average earn more than lawyers and engineers, the McKinsey study found.
(http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/opinion/13kristof.html)
Teaching is an incredibly difficult job; and teachers as a profession don't get anywhere near the respect and compensation they deserve. But so long as we take the approach that anyone who shows an interest in teaching is entitled to do so, be paid handsomely, and face little evaluation, any attempt to raise the profile of primary & secondary school educators is going to be counterproductive.
by oboe on Nov 8, 2011 2:54 pm
I don't disagree with what you're saying, but teachers aren't the ones charged with making decisions with limited resources.
It's interesting that you mention how teachers and students might feel like they're being treated like widgets. In my opinion that appears to be how every group of stakeholders or groups with power treat education in the US, usually with one-size fits all solutions.
by Fitz on Nov 8, 2011 3:18 pm
Indeed. One of the distinguishing characteristics of the Finnish system is extraodinary freedom given to teachers in the classroom, i.e. no standardized tests.
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 3:35 pm
@Oboe, now why would I think you are picking on me?
Re: your points, I don't think you are being fair to the current crop of "professionals." That is, the overwhelming majority of teachers are "professionals" who completed their college coursework and subsequent teacher certifications.
How do you view Teach For America's role in "de/professionalizing" teaching? Most of them do not arrive in the classrooms equipped with same level of expertise as their college-trained counterparts. Yet the program itself has grown in stature over the last few years.
Believe me, I get your point. But teaching is a profession where you actually can obtain a certification not based on your academic background. Outside of programs like TFA, it's almost similar to other professions such as law, where your academic background doesn't form the basis for your entry.
You already know I live on the soufsyde and see on a very micro level, that (for me) teaching would in no be sexy or a "in" thing to do. Most importantly, there is no economic incentive since I would be subject to an unwelcomed pay cut. I considered doing it because I know there is a serious deficit of black male teachers (especially in English) and have no doubt that my contribution would be great in scope and sincere in effort.
by HogWash on Nov 8, 2011 3:51 pm
Personally, I don't care. As long as you have the vision, purpose and committment, I say go for it. Teaching, like volunteering, will never be for everybody and that's ok.
by HogWash on Nov 8, 2011 3:59 pm
I think the motivation is to help those percieved to be (and in reality) disadvantaged socially/economically. Those same volunteering-white-people would be helping poor white folks if they lived in Appalachia or Michigans U.P. instead of DC.
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 4:10 pm
I think this is the pervading sentiment that drives oboe crazy.
oboe asks "why don't we say Teaching, like brain surgery, will never be for everybody and that's ok.", thus changing teaching from a profession of those with big hearts willing to make sacrifices to one of people with enormous skill.
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 4:17 pm
by Tina on Nov 8, 2011 4:24 pm
oboe asks "why don't we say Teaching, like brain surgery, will never be for everybody and that's ok.", thus changing teaching from a profession of those with big hearts willing to make sacrifices to one of people with enormous skill.
Thanks, Tina. Much better than I could put it.
As far as the current crop of teachers, the overwhelming majority of are extremely hard-working and effective. But leaving that aside, the respect a given profession gets seems to be function of how selective it is.
Heck, to loop back to HogWash's reference to TFA, that may be the most brilliant propaganda point for that organization. Whatever you say about retention rates, effectiveness, etc, etc... it's extremely difficult to get into the program.
by oboe on Nov 8, 2011 5:06 pm
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/12/education/12winerip.html?_r=1&hp
by oboe on Nov 8, 2011 5:12 pm
http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2011/06/dr-mark-naison-teach-for-america-and-me.html
by Richard Layman on Nov 8, 2011 7:33 pm
by Ward 1 Guy on Nov 9, 2011 9:14 am
by Ward 1 Guy on Nov 9, 2011 9:18 am
by Brooklander Parent on Nov 10, 2011 10:10 am
What I find frustrating about this post and even all the comments is the complete absence of discussion of what is being taught. The curriculum and content needs to be stronger and we see this weakness more for poorer kids. Teachers need more curriculum supports, that is what can pull good teachers into great teachers.
by Brooklander Parent on Nov 10, 2011 10:12 am
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/paperwork-burden-plagues-teachers/2011/11/11/gIQALB3aFN_story.html
And this comment by a DCPS teacher tells the story:
"We've been complaining about this in DCPS ever since Rhee/Henderson came on board. It's all about data these days and our professional development days are all about crunching numbers, looking at data and sifting through scores. NEVER is there any talk about how to create engaging and effective and interesting lessons...nor is there time to collaborate with other teachers about those things. It's all about data because that's the only thing those in the central office understands.
In addition, many teachers are reluctant to try new lessons or take risks because of IMPACT. If you try something new and it doesn't work out well you run the risk that may be the time a master educator or a principal will walk in to do an observation. So we stick with what "looks good" and what will "pass" IMPACT so we can keep our jobs. The teaching "profession" is moving further and further away from becoming a real profession. It's sad."
by Tina on Nov 14, 2011 10:06 am
Add a Comment