I don't get it

KTVB on the passing of 2 out of 3 Luna bills

from the article:"This is the pay for performance bill. More specifically, this is the bill that gives teachers bonuses when their students do well on tests."

Why are teachers protesting a bill which would reward them when they do a good job? This bill says nothing about punishing teachers whose students don't do a good job.

I understand teachers feeling a little angst about the first bill passed, which perhaps does punish teachers by: not allowing teachers who have received court orders to stay away from minors to get paid, giving more control to local school officers, allowing a teensy-tiny bit more parent input in teacher evaluation, and limiting tenure. It means that they have less job security. But it's no worse than the job security of anyone else who has to maintain a level of performance that justifies the paycheck they receive.

UPDATE: This article just appeared in Fox news. Note the last line which reads:

"The biggest piece of Luna's reform package remains stalled in the Senate. That legislation would boost technology in the classroom, require online courses and increase the minimum teacher pay from $29,655 to $30,000..."

Again, I don't understand--griping about an increase of minimum wage? OK, to be fair, the bill also included increasing class size.

I know a lot of great teachers, and I had a lot of great teachers. My guess is that those great teachers' jobs won't be on the chopping block if cuts need to be made.

p.s. A few weeks ago, I wrote to my state senator, and he wrote the following explanation of the bills that are in question:

Thank you for your message and for sharing your views with me about the education reform bills. The final package contained three bills: S1113-Modernization & Reform; and S1110-Pay for Performance; and S1108 – Labor Relations. Last Thursday, I voted AGAINST S1113 and FOR S1110 and S1108.

S1113 (Modernization & Reform) increases the student-teacher divisor to pay for a 1:1 ratio of computers to high school students while requiring four on-line classes during high school. Expressed public sentiment was overwhelmingly against this proposal as written. More public and stakeholder consultation and collaboration are necessary so that an improved plan can be crafted and consensus reached.

S1110 (Pay for Performance) was negotiated with stakeholders for nearly nine months before general agreement was reached. The plan rewards schools for student growth achieved during the academic year. It pays teachers extra for teaching in hard to fill positions and for taking on leadership roles. The plan is based upon the principle that if you reward something, you will get more of it. The New Plymouth School District instituted a pay for performance plan and has achieved amazing results.

S1108 (Labor Relations) supports student growth and local control. It is generally supported by the Idaho School Boards Association, Idaho Associations of School Administrators, and the Idaho Business Coalition for Education Excellence. Some features are:

• Performance evaluations focus on student growth and school board chooses evaluation criteria;

• Principal has discretion in new hires;

• Parents have some input for performance evaluations (could be as little as 1%);

• Employees ordered by court to stay away from minors put on unpaid leave. This protects kids and frees up more money for education;

• During reductions in force, needs of the students take priority over seniority;

• Courts will review school board action for propriety, but will not hear cases from scratch. Less court costs mean more money for education.

• Master contract limitations of one year allow school board to respond to citizens rather than having their hands tied by past boards that are no longer in office;

• Public negotiations and open records ensure transparency and a more accountable government.


I hope that the information above is helpful to you. If my reply to your message was not immediate, I apologize. I read every message as it arrived and considered its contents carefully. The proposed changes to education have resulted in a flood of correspondence that I have tended to personally with the help of one part-time volunteer. Your message helped shaped my opinion of these proposals. I will keep your message and this reply on file for future reference.



Kindly,


Senator Mitch Toryanski