In response to another reader, this Florida teacher describes a plan for teacher professionalism that worked very well but was de-funded by the Legislature.
In Florida, we used to have a system in place for such merit: It was pay for National Board Certification. Teachers went through a very rigorous process of evaluations, lesson planning, test-taking, etc. over a year and submitted their work to a national organization to be evaluated. It was a tough process, and not every teacher made it. Some teachers took several years of re-submitting their work before they were considered National Board Certified.
Once teachers earned initial certification, they were expected to become mentor teachers to newer teachers. The idea was to help develop and retain other strong teachers in the field.
Florida used to pay for the costly process of becoming certified. Once teachers were certified, they got an bonus of several thousand dollars- merit pay if you will- each year. They even had to re-certify every few years. Beyond that, NBCT teachers were paid bonus money for the number of hours they put in mentoring.
So what happened to this system of merit pay? It got cut. Completely done away with. The legislature used to fully fund it, but even before the economy tanked (because of course, that would be the argument for doing away with a program that actually improved the teaching profession and retained the best teachers) they cut all funding for the program. The very same legislators who pushed through our ill-conceived current merit pay plan- cut all funding for a merit-pay program that was actually working.
And how much funding is there now for our current merit-pay plan based strictly on test scores? Nada. Nothing. Zilch. How in the world does any businessman propose a merit pay plan with no actual merit?
It’s destined to fail in every capacity. Well, except one: increasing the bottom-line for test companies. As we divert (not come up with new funding, but divert from existing classroom funds) millions of dollars into hundreds of new poorly-written tests meant to “fit” this merit pay plan and determine who the “best” teachers are.
And as others have said, you are trying to quantify something that can’t be measured. Bonuses for coaching, sponsoring clubs, taking on leadership roles, extra tutoring, going through rigourous evaluation systems like National Board, I could buy it- those generally are your best teachers who truly are there for the kids.
But what we are doing with test scores is a complete joke. This WILL fail and I pray in a few years the pendulum starts to swing back towards common sense.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
So true and this is why Florida is losing all of it’s great older Teachers with Masters degrees… and getting new college grads…
LikeLike
The experience here in Washington state has Bern that each of several attempts at merit pay have gone the same way. Each eventually lost it’s funding. One os several reason I oppose it.
LikeLike
This also happened when I first certified in Ohio. It’s still strong in Washington, because NBCTs work side by side with OSPI and lawmakers to keep it intact. I’m now in Oregon, where you mention being a NBCT and others either say, “You’re a what?” or “Why would you bother?”
It’s the best professional growth opportunity ever. Ever. It’s all about impacting student learning.
Florida teacher, you are so right. I hope you’re right about the pendulum, too.
LikeLike
Just don’t think that you are a better teacher than somebody who doesn’t bother with it or fails it. The fact is national certification is just another scam and an extremely expensive way to obtain “professional growth.”
LikeLike
It’s not about being better than someone else – that’s current reform mentality. It’s about being the best that I can be. I know I am a better teacher because of the process, and the benefits to my students are the only thing that’s important. My certification was funded by the state, in 1997.
LikeLike
In Oklahoma, we’re losing our support also. I have a theory about the establishment of a scholarship, training and support for candidates, and the stipends for NBCTs. I believe SOME legislators thought years ago that it was a low-risk gesture on their part, because 1. they didn’t think teachers would willingly challenge themselves to go through the rigorous process, and 2. they didn’t think we were smart enough to achieve NBC. 2,994 NBCTs later, they’re doing everything they can to kill this amazing program of support and training.
One scheme in last year’s legislative session would have phased out payments to NBCTs, ended all scholarships and training, and would have reassigned all the funds to our new ‘merit pay’ teacher evaluation system.
NBCT stipends are really ‘incentive’ pay. “If you do this, we’ll reward you by giving you that.” Now, they don’t need incentive pay — they can beat us up with Their complicated, convoluted merit pay program and ‘prove’ to the world that we’re ineffective deadbeats.
Oklahoma was once a national leader in the number of NBCTs achieving certification, but our program dwindled from 400 candidates two years ago statewide to 9 candidates who went through the process knowing they may never see a penny of stipend money. What heroes those nine teachers were…
LikeLike
It’s not a pendulum that’s swinging back and forth now. It’s a wrecking ball.
LikeLike
True. We can’t just wait this one out.
LikeLike
Louisiana cut its pay to National Board Certified Teachers, as well. Some parishes have left in some monetary reward. Yet, now LA is on the performance pay bandwagon. Money? Who knows. Freeze in MFP for 4 years of which part is used to establish a base pay for teachers. We also will have millions of dollars going to vouchers from that same funding force. Those teachers in voucher schools don’t need any certification. Priorities are certainly messed up!
LikeLike
National Board stipends are alive and well in Washington State. Our 2011 payment has been delayed (it’s supposed to show up at the beginning of September), but funding has not been diminished nor cut. Even after 7 years of certification, I’m still pretty ambivalent about the process. I cannot say I’m a better teacher as a result of becoming certified. (I remember reading promo material, where a teacher said, “I’m a much better teacher now that I’m a National Board Certified teacher. Now, I actually reflect upon my practices…” to which I responded, “What the heck were you doing before certification?”) It was an intense year, but not in terms of writing/filming/testing. My stress came from all of the rules that were to be followed, right down to numbering pages for entries. I found conflicting advice within the instructions as to where numbering was to begin. THIS is what caused me to panic, not proving that my students were learning. Anything that is that rule bound is suspect.
LikeLike
In Rhee’s DC, National Board stipends, funding, awareness and support was ended in DC almost upon her immediate arrival. She stated that there was no research (or research generated by her TNTP or TFA ) that justified the investment or efficacy of National Board certification. She also believed: “It didn’t seem like the best investment,” Rhee said. “It seemed to us that there was a more foundational level of professional development we needed to do with our staff,” she said, before teachers reached for the national board certification. (The $4,000 stipend, a provision of the current contract with the Washington Teachers’ Union, remains in place).
In DC, Rhee eliminated the content directors for each subject area. Our staff development consisted of IMPACT training, reading the 30 page plus document, data analysis, scoring BCR’s , writing prompts, and developing test taking strategies and writing prompts for our students. What a waste of time. What an insult to our intelligence and professionalism.
LikeLike
NY still has a viable National Board program. The cost is 4/5 paid through the Albert Shanker Foundation.
The UFT provides
LikeLike
Florida released its value added scores for teachers today. Districts are looking them over before they are released to teachers and principals. Nice way to start the school year: “Oh yeah, remember we didn’t quite finish your evaluation last year. Let’s see what you are now that the VAM scores are here! Oh my, too bad, your scores aren’t so good. You are in need of improvement. And have a really great beginning of school!”
LikeLike
Sad, sick, disgusting, insane, stupid, inane, outrageous, unethical, appalling, migraine inducing idiocy is what it is.
Who are the stupid, idiotic, bastard nimrods that think this stuff up and then implement it. How f…..ng insane.
Yep, I think Lewis Black had it right when he said (paraphrasing as a teacher) “I should have taken LSD when I was younger to prepare myself for times like these”.
LikeLike
Disagree about the National Board certification. It is a joke, and not an indication at all of “teacher quality.” Lots of great teachers fail it, and lots of lousy ones get it. Many other teachers don’t bother with wasting the money on it preferring to get master’s degrees and doctorates, which are actually useful. The board certification is also easily gamed. Besides, the reason it was created in the first place was as a response to the 1983 A Nation at Risk, which everybody knows or SHOULD know was a complete and total fraud.
The ONLY reason anybody wastes money on such a dumb certification is to get an increase in the salary scale.
LikeLike
The national certification needs to die, as far as I am concerned. It plays right into the lies of the reformers.
LikeLike
My education masters, which I was forced to get on top of my biochem masters to move up the pay scale (Masters had to be obtained AFTER initial certification in my state at that time) was not in the least useful to my classroom practice. My doctorate in science education is marginally useful in my classroom, moreso when I work with pre-service teachers. The National Board process made my examine what I as actually doing in the classroom. Renewing National Board requires showing impact on student learning based on the teacher’s own professional growth. I’ve facilitated renewal candidates for 4 years now, and I’ve never worked with a more amazing group of teachers, anywhere, ever. They are very proactive with reform, preferring to take the bull by the horns and deal with lawmakers. Very impressive. I’m sorry your experience hasn’t been so good. Like any worthwhile professional development opportunity, you have to put in 100% if you expect to reap the benefits.
LikeLike
“Like any worthwhile professional development opportunity, you have to put in 100% if you expect to reap the benefits.”
Another not so subtle stab at teachers. Excuuuuse me!!!
I looked into the NBCT and concluded it would do nothing more than what I already was doing. What you’re saying is that the “ordinary” teachers don’t conscientiously “develop professionally”, that is to say practice reflective thinking of their methods, curriculum, practices on a day to day, hour to hour and minute by minute basis. Hogwash! It is a way of sorting and separating teachers into categories supposedly on some kind of merit/metric. More of pitting teachers against teachers. In my opinion, NBCT is a sham as any “standardized/metricsized” process is due to various logical errors in the evaluation process.
No, thanks, keep it for yourself, your invested in it. The money and effort could be well better spent on many other pressing needs.
LikeLike
Duane-
There is a difference between a statement made about a teacher and a statement made about teachers.
LikeLike
TE,
I read (present tense) as a jab/slight of teachers and the profession, plain and simple.
LikeLike
Duane
The reader is a teacher. Jabbing herself? It might be good to read these comments with a bit more charity.
LikeLike
Glad to see part of our exchange set out here.
the other reader
LikeLike
¡Qué!
LikeLike
Duane-
This comment was made in response to several points I made. You were involved as well.
I was reacting to several comments that suggested merit based salary implies that teachers are lazy and don’t work.
I argued that merit based salary could be seen as a way to keep great teachers in the teaching profession as they are likely to have well paid opportunities outside the teaching profession.
Dr. Ravitch said merit pay was demoralizing and standardized tests did no measure merit.
I said I was talking about higher pay for the best teachers, not how to determine who the best teachers are, and pointed out that peer evaluation is used successfully in higher education to evaluate merit and, in turn, salary.
Dr. Ravitch said standardized tests do not measure merit
I said a merit pay system need not be based on test scores
Dr. Ravitch said all merit pay systems are based on test scores
I repeated the statement that merit systems need not be based on student test scores, asking if she thought the peer based evaluations in higher education worked reasonably well
You said it is impossible to know if someone is a good teacher
Dr. Ravitch said that peer evaluation would not pick out the same teachers as test scores
I explained again that I had never suggested using test scores to determine merit, and went back to the peer evaluation idea.
Melvin, responding to my posts, talked about the old plan in Florida. The post begins “@Teaching Economist- you make some interesting points. In fact, in Florida, we used to have a system…..”
I would certainly call this a merit pay system that is not based on student test scores. I see from the posts here that the accuracy of this method of evaluating merit is also disputed.
LikeLike
Thanks for the clarification as I’m not a mind reader. It has been an interesting and a bit enlightening exchange. Thanks!
LikeLike
I was a good teacher before I went through National Boards. It was a grueling process–I had three episodes of shingles during that year, and cried the entire month of January. But I came out the other end a much better teacher, and I can document the impact I’ve had on student learning and student lives. If you’re NBCT, you’re highly effective–one might even say you’re one of the “irreplaceable” teachers that are beginning to make the news. BUT…you can’t use test scores to show student learning–it’s a much more complex and subtle process of actually looking at students as individuals and measuring learning in many ways. This is not comprehensible to anal-retentive number-crunching business-type reformers, who see the world in black and white–their world is binary. Research has shown that NBCTs are highly effective teachers. Several of my fellow NBCTs are leaving teaching for the private sector, and many others are retiring early, because of the “reforms” in education. So not only are the reformers destroying a program that increases teacher effectiveness, they’re driving effective teachers out of the classroom. I’m sad for our students, because they’re the ones that are getting the raw deal.
LikeLike
“Research has shown that NBCTs are highly effective teachers.”
Show me the research!
LikeLike
I am a National Board Certified Teacher. I also worked for the National Board as a certificate developer, assessor, and in their teacher leadership and policy outreach divisions, then returned to the classroom. I have seen National Board Certification from all sides.
First–there have been well over 200 studies done on NB Certification, and nearly all show that NBC Teachers are highly effective. The studies have been done by major research institutions as well as university-based critics of national certification for teachers, and have examined all aspects of the process. The National Research Council published a federally funded, well-respected meta-analysis of the major studies in 2008, during the Bush admin: http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12224
One more–here is a report written by actual teachers, analyzing the impact of National Board Certification on their practice, as well as a couple dozen major research reports. It addresses some of the familiar objections and remarks found in the comments on this blog: http://www.nbpts.org/userfiles/File/CTQ_Report_FINAL.pdf
In short, research has convincingly demonstrated that NBCTs are effective. Not “better” than other teachers–effective. And especially effective in low-performing schools–which supports state policies that provide stipends for NBCTs.
There are many candidates, like Teacher from the West, who find that they’re already reflecting daily, planning carefully, delivering instruction using multiple paths to learning, and assessing carefully– and that going through the process is simply an exercise in exhaustively documenting that practice. Others see NB Cert as professional development, learning to do things they weren’t doing before–and either experience is beneficial to kids and learning.
Yes, the NB experience feels annoyingly nit-picky. But that’s about psychometric integrity, not the NB being overly rule-bound. In order for scores to be psychometrically valid and reliable, teachers have to follow explicit assessment rules. It’s annoying–but clean assessment procedures are what yield useable data.
Here’s what I worry about: NBPTS has now been taken over by Pearson. The teacher-led, teacher-developed goals of the original founders’ mission–using teacher expertise to shape education reform–are so far from what we’re doing now it’s frightening. And–the US Dept Of Ed decided not to put the National Board in their last budget. They gave $$ to Teach for America instead.
Perhaps–as a profession–we need to be worried about the one major national attempt to set professional standards of practice. That fact that many states are dismantling their NBC programs (since they’re not getting federal money) is a harbinger of more de-skilling and de-professionalizing to come.
LikeLike
Thanks for the links. Will have to get to them later. Tomatoes are calling!
One quick comment though. “But that’s about psychometric integrity,” “psychometric integrity”-Isn’t that an oxymoron?
If you have read my many comment here I basically view psychometrics as an extension of the “science” from which it originated-Eugenics.
LikeLike