Wednesday, January 28, 2009

crrrrrazy ed reform in HB 1410

The WEA is steamed about HB 1410 (2009-10), all 111 ed-reforming pages of it. (Really. You want to read the entirety of the 111-page bill? Go right ahead [pdf].)

What has the WEA in a froth is, primarily, the bill's destruction of the state salary schedule. Adios, degree-based salary advancement (pp. 36ff):
The salary schedule shall not provide increased salaries based on continuing education credits or academic degrees.
No grandfathering, mind you, for the teachers who dutifully went along with the old ways, spending hours, days, weeks, months, or years of their time to get that master's (pp. 41ff):
(1) Certificated instructional staff whose first employment with a school district commenced before the 2012-13 school year have the option to make an irrevocable transfer to the compensation system with salary allocations provided under section 204 of this act....

(3) Any employee subject to this section who has not transferred to the new compensation system by November 15, 2021, shall be automatically transferred effective September 1, 2022.
So you've got ten years to milk that master's for all it's worth. Yet the bill makes it seem like the state is trying to model compensation after the wider professional world, including...
19 (a) Results of the preliminary labor market survey and analysis conducted under this section and other information about average salaries for noneducators in comparable occupations in Washington, including noneducators at the beginning of their careers and various types of educational staff associates working in noneducational settings;
Here's a tip: in other professions, advanced degrees mean a higher salary. Heck, many companies pay for their employees' schooling.

There's more, including a fun phrase, "academic watch," that turns the bill into a miniature NCLB Act, rubrics aplenty, "team-based bonuses," recommended class sizes, Core 24 and much, much more.

The bill's status: it's been sent to the Education Appropriations committee. Here are their phone numbers and emails. They met tonight for a public hearing at 6:00. I wasn't there.

I was too busy reading the bill.


Dr Pezz said...

I have a feeling they will think twice about this. It always sounds good until it has to be enacted (when the idea people have a reckoning with the details people).

Anonymous said...

Also important to realize is that 50% of the current teaching corps will have retired by 2021. Teachers entering the system now will know not to spend their time and money on their masters because it won't get them to a higher salary level, and also has been shown in the research to not have very much effect on the quality of thir teaching. People who currently hold a masters or PhD. can continue with their higher level of pay for another 10 years before having to switch to the new system. Younger teachers may notice that the new system starts them out at a higher pay rate, and gives them bumps in pay without having to spend so much money on higher education, but rather fro showing proficiency in teaching. There are clearly some detais which stil need to be ironed out, but I think there is a lot to like here, and if we all work together, I am sure tht we can find a way for it to work for all.

Jim Anderson said...

So, 50% are fine. Good for them. What about the rest of us? I'm personally fine because I've already earned National Board certification, but why not simply grandfather in those who played by the rules? That's how it worked concerning certification--it's not like career high school lit teachers with general certificates had to go back and get, say, 6-12 English credentials.