For virtually every school district in the country teacher pay depends upon a teacher’s years of experience (steps) and some measure of educational attainment (columns). Harrison School District Two in Colorado made national news when it announced their new salary schedule which moves away from the step and column approach. There proposal appears to be a perfectly rational and balanced approach. See the charts below for more details. The district will conduct evaluations, incorporate outcomes, and consider level of educational experience. This data will annually be assessed to determine whether a teacher advances to the next pay level gets a raise, or advances to the next job description (gets a promotion). Presumably over time, teachers would receive a cost of living adjustment even if they stay at the same salary tier. Teachers will initially be placed on thin the new salary tiers with plenty of room to grow. If a teacher receives three consecutive poor evaluations, the teacher can go down a level.
What is shocking to anyone who doesn’t work in education, is that this a major innovation in teacher compensation. Prior to working for Education Sector, I worked for state government ( for the Legislature in California), and had basically the same type of salary structure being implemented by Harrison. Annually, I was reviewed, and based on the review of the work that I had done that year and an evaluation of my superior, I would either advance a tier or two (we had a few more tiers than this system). Over time, the super stars advanced a little faster than others, the generally effective staff advanced, but more slowly, and a few would remain at the same pay level for several years, and then many of them would decide this was not the profession for them.
So, why is it so revolutionary for a school district to adopt a typical civil service salary structure? A big part of the difference is that the administration for the first time can signal to a teacher that her performance matters. This reform will require significant improvements in the quality of the teacher evaluations that are done. And, ideally the results of the evaluations would be linked to the district’s professional development strategy. Now this proposal does not go far enough, but it is a start. The next step, might be to actually let a teacher go who receives three poor evaluations in a row.
Click Image To Enlarge
5/11/2012 | U.S. News & World Report highlights ideas from "Moving On Up: How Tuition Tax Breaks Increasingly Favor the Upper-Middle Class." 
5/11/2012 | In Diverse, Steve Burd comments on the Obama administration's plans to address student debt. 
5/11/2012 | Kevin Carey talks to Salon about the government's role in rising student debt.
{ 2 comments }
This reform will require significant improvements in the quality of the teacher evaluations that are done.
This seems to be a rather glaring shortcoming. Should anyone implement a new pay scale before the means exist to implement it?
I think there may be another difference between your experience in the civil service and what’s happening in Harrison School District Two. A portion of a teacher’s evaluation will be based on student growth. While that might not seem all too revolutionary to people outside of education, it represents quite a big change. Let’s not forget that VAM is still a developing science, so confidence in those measures isn’t unshakable. In states where proposals would link half or more of a teacher’s evaluation to student growth, teachers are being asked to do something quite revolutionary, indeed–and we can forgive them for feeling queasy about it.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }