Public education reform needed

As school boards and teachers prepare to institute the reforms passed by the Indiana state legislature last session, grumbles from educators can already be heard.

For a group that claims to have the best interest of students in mind, you’d think a reform package that is almost identical to the one passed by Jeb Bush in Florida would have them ecstatic.

Bush’s reforms caused a 21-percent increase in the state’s overall high school graduation rate and a 400-percent increase in students who take and pass AP exams.
 
The reforms also caused a nation-leading 47.2-percent increase in combined gains in math and reading for free and reduced lunch eligible children between 2003 and 2009, according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

When it comes to advancement in education, it’s hard to argue with Bush’s success in Florida. Even the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has recognized it through support of his Foundation for Excellence in Education.

So, why are teachers so vocal in their opposition to the same reforms in Indiana schools? Hint: It has nothing to do with how the reforms will affect the quality of education.

Rather, it has everything to do with how it will make them more accountable for their performance. No longer will teacher pay necessarily be determined solely by how many years a teacher has been teaching or how many degrees they have.

Those factors can contribute to no more than 33 percent of teacher pay. The rest will be determined by other factors such as student success.

Because of this, some teachers are upset because the state incentive for getting post-graduate degrees is now not as great as it once was.

Although, if the point of getting a master’s degree in the first place is to become a better teacher, that should come across in merit pay, right? If it does not, doesn’t it demonstrate that having a post-graduate degree does not necessarily make one a better teacher?

And if it does not make one a better teacher, aren’t we glad taxpayers are no longer paying for the degree?

Similarly, when teacher reductions need to happen, performance will take precedent, not tenure.

“No longer will the least effective teacher in the school be treated as the most effective,” Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett said.

Some also argue this system will increase competition among teachers because it creates four categories into which they can be placed: “Highly effective,” “Effective,” “Improvement necessary” and “Ineffective.”

My question to them is, why will it increase competition?

It’s not like principals are required to place a certain number of educators in each category. Nobody wants to mischaracterize teachers. If all teachers in a school corporation improve their students’ relative performances, they will all be rewarded. So, why the need to compete against one another?

The only competition will take place between schools as a result of the new school voucher system that empowers parents to send their children to the school they think is best for their child.

This means schools must compete for students, which adds another layer of accountability. And this is a good thing: When in our history has competition ever not improved the product?

But it’s important to note that student success isn’t the entirety of the equation either. Rather, it is one of many metrics that will go into determining teacher pay. Each individual school board in consultation with teachers and the community will determine the other metrics, which, as I noted, can include seniority and number of degrees.

In this way, each community can determine how best to keep their teachers accountable, taking into account diverse local factors.

This discussion will continue until the reform results start to trickle in. If they are anything like the results in Florida, Hoosiers should rejoice and similar education platforms focused on accountability should be passed throughout the country.

— nperrino@indiana.edu