APP - Economists want to stop teachers' degree bonuses

Schadenfreude

patriot and widower
i wonder if there is a difference between advanced degrees in education and other subjects such as math and the sciences - otherwise, a good idea

Associated Press/AP Online
content_divider_short.jpg


By DONNA GORDON BLANKINSHIP

SEATTLE - Every year, American schools pay more than $8.6 billion in bonuses to teachers with master's degrees, even though the idea that a higher degree makes a teacher more effective has been mostly debunked.
Despite more than a decade of research showing the money has little impact on student achievement, state lawmakers and other officials have been reluctant to tackle this popular way for teachers to earn more money.
That could soon change, as local school districts around the country grapple with shrinking budgets.
Just this week, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said the economy has given the nation an opportunity to make dramatic improvements in the productivity of its education system and to do more of what works and less of what doesn't.
Duncan told the American Enterprise Institute on Wednesday that master's degree bonuses are an example of spending money on something that doesn't work.
On Friday, billionaire Bill Gates took aim at school budgets and the master's degree bonus.
"My own state of Washington has an average salary bump of nearly $11,000 for a master's degree - and more than half of our teachers get it. That's more than $300 million every year that doesn't help kids," he said.
"And that's one state," said Gates, the co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, at a speech Friday in Louisville to the Council of Chief State School Officers. Gates also took aim at pensions and seniority.
"Of course, restructuring pay systems is like kicking a beehive," he acknowledged.
As of 2008, 48 percent of public school teachers in this country had a master's degree or above, and nearly every one of them got a bonus of between $1,423 and $10,777 each year, according to research from the University of Washington.
Most school budgets have been tight for years, with districts trimming everything from printing to teachers.
Michael Podgursky, an economics professor at the University of Missouri, said the economic downturn may force payroll reform in some places where the political will has been lacking. And they don't have to blow up the old system to do it, he said.
"We're experimenting now," he said, noting pay-for-performance experiments in New York City, Houston and Nashville.
Ninety percent of teachers' masters degrees are in education, not subjects such as English or math, according to a study by Marguerite Roza and Raegen Miller for the Center on Reinventing Education at the University of Washington.
Their colleague, research professor Dan Goldhaber, explained that that research dating back to a study he did in 1997 has shown that students of teachers with master's degrees show no better progress in student achievement than their peers taught by teachers without advanced degrees.
Goldhaber said his findings were criticized vehemently in the 1990s, but repeated studies since then have confirmed the results.
Roza and Miller found more than 2 percent of total education spending in 13 states - Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Ohio and South Carolina, plus Washington and Nebraska, where the dollars topped 3 percent - went to masters degree bonuses.
The American Federation of Teachers, the nation's second largest teachers union doesn't oppose changes in the way teachers are paid and is willing to talk about just about any reform idea, said Rob Weil, deputy director of educational issues.
"We're not opposed to looking at compensation systems and making sure our compensation moves forward and changes with the times," he said. But, he adds, "Change for change's sake isn't what we ought to be doing."
Weil said the problem is that most school districts don't know what they want to do instead of the traditional salary schedule that gives teachers more money for years of service and additional education.
"I go into school districts all the time and say, 'What do you want to pay for?' and that's when nobody's home," he said.
The National Education Association, which is the nation's largest teacher's union, has floated the idea of paying higher starting salaries for teachers to attract more and better teachers to the profession. Others have suggested rewarding teachers for student achievement gains.
American teacher pay has been structured the same way in every state since before World War II. Before then, high school teachers were paid more than primary school instructors. Establishing one pay rate was a feminist issue since teachers in the younger grades used to be mostly women and most high school teachers were men.
Even in states where teacher pay is set by the school district according to market factors, the pay schedule has been the same way for many decades, Podgursky said.
Debating a change could be more controversial and unpopular than cutting chocolate milk from the school cafeteria menu.
But education economists believe this idea can't be ignored forever, because teacher pay is the biggest part of education budgets and the salary schedule drives that spending.
Erick Hanushek, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, said this kind of contract change would be difficult but not impossible, despite teachers unions being among the most influential lobbies in many state capitols.
School districts won't save much money because they won't be able to cut teacher pay overall, but they could start redirecting cash to the most effective teachers, as measured in ways other than what degrees they have earned, he said.
Teachers may need to accept a two-tiered system at first to grandfather in those getting the bonuses. The biggest losers will be university education schools, because they make a lot of money on master's degrees, Hanushek said.
"There's a relationship between education schools and teachers that is not particularly healthy," he said.
Hanushek said the University of Washington estimate of the $8.6 billion annual cost of master's degree money is low.
"It's what you would call free money, but not from a political standpoint," he said.


A service of YellowBrix, Inc. .
 
i wonder if there is a difference between advanced degrees in education and other subjects such as math and the sciences - otherwise, a good idea

Associated Press/AP Online
content_divider_short.jpg


By DONNA GORDON BLANKINSHIP

SEATTLE - Every year, American schools pay more than $8.6 billion in bonuses to teachers with master's degrees, even though the idea that a higher degree makes a teacher more effective has been mostly debunked.
Despite more than a decade of research showing the money has little impact on student achievement, state lawmakers and other officials have been reluctant to tackle this popular way for teachers to earn more money.
That could soon change, as local school districts around the country grapple with shrinking budgets.
Just this week, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said the economy has given the nation an opportunity to make dramatic improvements in the productivity of its education system and to do more of what works and less of what doesn't.
Duncan told the American Enterprise Institute on Wednesday that master's degree bonuses are an example of spending money on something that doesn't work.
On Friday, billionaire Bill Gates took aim at school budgets and the master's degree bonus.
"My own state of Washington has an average salary bump of nearly $11,000 for a master's degree - and more than half of our teachers get it. That's more than $300 million every year that doesn't help kids," he said.
"And that's one state," said Gates, the co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, at a speech Friday in Louisville to the Council of Chief State School Officers. Gates also took aim at pensions and seniority.
"Of course, restructuring pay systems is like kicking a beehive," he acknowledged.
As of 2008, 48 percent of public school teachers in this country had a master's degree or above, and nearly every one of them got a bonus of between $1,423 and $10,777 each year, according to research from the University of Washington.
Most school budgets have been tight for years, with districts trimming everything from printing to teachers.
Michael Podgursky, an economics professor at the University of Missouri, said the economic downturn may force payroll reform in some places where the political will has been lacking. And they don't have to blow up the old system to do it, he said.
"We're experimenting now," he said, noting pay-for-performance experiments in New York City, Houston and Nashville.
Ninety percent of teachers' masters degrees are in education, not subjects such as English or math, according to a study by Marguerite Roza and Raegen Miller for the Center on Reinventing Education at the University of Washington.
Their colleague, research professor Dan Goldhaber, explained that that research dating back to a study he did in 1997 has shown that students of teachers with master's degrees show no better progress in student achievement than their peers taught by teachers without advanced degrees.
Goldhaber said his findings were criticized vehemently in the 1990s, but repeated studies since then have confirmed the results.
Roza and Miller found more than 2 percent of total education spending in 13 states - Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Ohio and South Carolina, plus Washington and Nebraska, where the dollars topped 3 percent - went to masters degree bonuses.
The American Federation of Teachers, the nation's second largest teachers union doesn't oppose changes in the way teachers are paid and is willing to talk about just about any reform idea, said Rob Weil, deputy director of educational issues.
"We're not opposed to looking at compensation systems and making sure our compensation moves forward and changes with the times," he said. But, he adds, "Change for change's sake isn't what we ought to be doing."
Weil said the problem is that most school districts don't know what they want to do instead of the traditional salary schedule that gives teachers more money for years of service and additional education.
"I go into school districts all the time and say, 'What do you want to pay for?' and that's when nobody's home," he said.
The National Education Association, which is the nation's largest teacher's union, has floated the idea of paying higher starting salaries for teachers to attract more and better teachers to the profession. Others have suggested rewarding teachers for student achievement gains.
American teacher pay has been structured the same way in every state since before World War II. Before then, high school teachers were paid more than primary school instructors. Establishing one pay rate was a feminist issue since teachers in the younger grades used to be mostly women and most high school teachers were men.
Even in states where teacher pay is set by the school district according to market factors, the pay schedule has been the same way for many decades, Podgursky said.
Debating a change could be more controversial and unpopular than cutting chocolate milk from the school cafeteria menu.
But education economists believe this idea can't be ignored forever, because teacher pay is the biggest part of education budgets and the salary schedule drives that spending.
Erick Hanushek, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, said this kind of contract change would be difficult but not impossible, despite teachers unions being among the most influential lobbies in many state capitols.
School districts won't save much money because they won't be able to cut teacher pay overall, but they could start redirecting cash to the most effective teachers, as measured in ways other than what degrees they have earned, he said.
Teachers may need to accept a two-tiered system at first to grandfather in those getting the bonuses. The biggest losers will be university education schools, because they make a lot of money on master's degrees, Hanushek said.
"There's a relationship between education schools and teachers that is not particularly healthy," he said.
Hanushek said the University of Washington estimate of the $8.6 billion annual cost of master's degree money is low.
"It's what you would call free money, but not from a political standpoint," he said.


A service of YellowBrix, Inc. .

The same principal could be applied to other jobs. Why would someone be required to have a high school diploma to throw garbage bags in the back of a truck?

Raking leaves. Planting flowers. Snow removal. The list goes on and on.

Furthermore, along with a salary savings there would be less employee turn-over as the employees would have fewer job opportunities elsewhere. In addition, jobs for the under-educated would go a long way to remove people from welfare.

There could be Federal and State laws forbidding education discrimination. All posted jobs would have to disclose the reason for the requested education.

Times, they are a-changin'.
 
I'm too often amazed at the arguments over salaries, teachers touch the future, they have great impact on the world we live in, and yet are always singled out as getting paid too much. The Union meme I suppose. Consider the children who hit or throw balls, childish games, who make millions, or financial people who do nothing productive, but make millions, or the executives of large corporations who often fail completely with millions in their pockets. Republicans argue against minimum wage, but worship at the money store and then work in think (?) tanks or businesses as consultants. What a twisted world we live in. My wife a school teacher for over twenty five years completely boycotts pro sports because of the absurdity of salary.
 
The same principal could be applied to other jobs. Why would someone be required to have a high school diploma to throw garbage bags in the back of a truck?

Raking leaves. Planting flowers. Snow removal. The list goes on and on.

Furthermore, along with a salary savings there would be less employee turn-over as the employees would have fewer job opportunities elsewhere. In addition, jobs for the under-educated would go a long way to remove people from welfare.

There could be Federal and State laws forbidding education discrimination. All posted jobs would have to disclose the reason for the requested education.

Times, they are a-changin'.
I don't think people will be happy till they find some way to teach paste eaters quantum physics by some teacher with a GED who works for minimum wage.

I mean lets ask a common sense question. Which is better for a school. To have teachers with more graduate degrees or less? To say studies have proven that more masters degrees doesn't translate to improved performance is missing the forest because of the trees.

Keep in mind that reading irrational shit like this is a large part of what keeps quality people out of education. Why in the fucking world would I take a pay cut so that I can have ignoramouses like Dixie and other arm chair quarter backs tell me how to do my job or what my salary should be and that my Masters isn't a consideration cause it doesn't directly correlate to student performance. OK well let me tell you something. My Masters degree isn't supposed to be a fucking measure of how students will perform. It's an indicator of how well I will perform and no matter how well I perform there's a good chance I'm not going to be able to teach your little paste eater QED in any meaninful fashion and I'll also tell you what my salary should be. It should be what the market will bear and if you want good people to teach your paste eating kids, well there aint no secret to that. You get what you pay for. I mean I got a $5000 bonus and a promotion with a raise in pay when I completed my Masters from my corporate employers, any of you want to bitch about that?
 
Last edited:
I'm too often amazed at the arguments over salaries, teachers touch the future, they have great impact on the world we live in, and yet are always singled out as getting paid too much. The Union meme I suppose. Consider the children who hit or throw balls, childish games, who make millions, or financial people who do nothing productive, but make millions, or the executives of large corporations who often fail completely with millions in their pockets. Republicans argue against minimum wage, but worship at the money store and then work in think (?) tanks or businesses as consultants. What a twisted world we live in. My wife a school teacher for over twenty five years completely boycotts pro sports because of the absurdity of salary.

Does she boycott Hollywood and movies as well?
 
I'm too often amazed at the arguments over salaries, teachers touch the future, they have great impact on the world we live in, and yet are always singled out as getting paid too much. The Union meme I suppose. Consider the children who hit or throw balls, childish games, who make millions, or financial people who do nothing productive, but make millions, or the executives of large corporations who often fail completely with millions in their pockets. Republicans argue against minimum wage, but worship at the money store and then work in think (?) tanks or businesses as consultants. What a twisted world we live in. My wife a school teacher for over twenty five years completely boycotts pro sports because of the absurdity of salary.

Apples and oranges.
 
I don't think people will be happy till they find some way to teach paste eaters quantum physics by some teacher with a GED who works for minimum wage.

I mean lets ask a common sense question. Which is better for a school. To have teachers with more graduate degrees or less? To say studies have proven that more masters degrees doesn't translate to improved performance is missing the forest because of the trees.

Keep in mind that reading irrational shit like this is a large part of what keeps quality people out of education. Why in the fucking world would I take a pay cut so that I can have ignoramouses like Dixie and other arm chair quarter backs tell me how to do my job or what my salary should be and that my Masters isn't a consideration cause it doesn't directly correlate to student performance. OK well let me tell you something. My Masters degree isn't supposed to be a fucking measure of how students will perform. It's an indicator of how well I will perform and no matter how well I perform there's a good chance I'm not going to be able to teach your little paste eater QED in any meaninful fashion and I'll also tell you what my salary should be. It should be what the market will bear and if you want good people to teach your paste eating kids, well there aint no secret to that. You get what you pay for. I mean I got a $5000 bonus and a promotion with a raise in pay when I completed my Masters from my corporate employers, any of you want to bitch about that?


Nice strawman, douchebag.

Paying pointy heads extra for no good reason (doesn't help the kids learn) is f***ing stupid
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice strawman, douchebag.

Paying pointy heads extra for no good reason (doesn't help the kids learn) is f***ing stupid

No, I'm sure your right that the world would be much better place with a well rounded lawn mower repairmen teaching our kids then some poindexter with a Masters degree.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A good education for the rich only is a core value of right wing corporate ideology. It's generational with them. If they can slowly destroy education then our ignorance is their strength.

Oh... and teachers unions generally back liberals and we all know that unions and not conserative ideology can be blamed for our present state.
 
I mean this is such a bulls**t thread. First, an educator isn't solely evaluated on some piece of paper they have hanging on a wall. Second, if anyone thinks it's a bad thing to incentivise educators to expand their own education by obtaining a graduate level education, well their fucking idiots and their opinion has no credibility what so ever.

That's what I tried pointing out earlier. I recieved a bonus when I got my Masters and a raise but do any of these people seriously think that when my employer evaluates my performance they say "Well you got a Masters degree...thats' good enough for us!"? Well I got news for them. It's the same thing with educators.

I mean can anyone but a total idiot really believe it's a bad thing to incentivise educators to get a graduate degree? Honestly? I mean for f***en real?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, I'm sure your right that the world would be much better place with a well rounded lawn mower repairmen teaching our kids then some poindexter with a Masters degree.

Yet another strawman. You are lame. I said paying teachers extra. I did not say to hire unqualified teachers. You have no reading comprehension or you are dishonestly trying to imply I said to hire lawnmower repairman, who BTW, are tax payers and deserve respect that liberals supposedly have for everyone( but clearly here, Mott is shown to be arrogant and insulting)

Fuck you!
 
Yet another strawman. You are lame. I said paying teachers extra. I did not say to hire unqualified teachers. You have no reading comprehension or you are dishonestly trying to imply I said to hire lawnmower repairman, who BTW, are tax payers and deserve respect that liberals supposedly have for everyone( but clearly here, Mott is shown to be arrogant and insulting)

Fuck you!
Hey I respect lawn mower repairmen just like I respect hookers but I don't want one hired to teach sex ed nor do I really care about their opinion on education policy.

Dude I mean talking about lame. You're just a right wing nut who hasn't a clue. Well let me be clear. I wish every school teacher in the nation had at least a masters degree and if giving them a bonus and a raise in pay will incentivize them to earn a masters degree then in the long run that's money well spent!
 
Hey I respect lawn mower repairmen just like I respect hookers but I don't want one hired to teach sex ed nor do I really care about their opinion on education policy.

Dude I mean talking about lame. You're just a right wing nut who hasn't a clue. Well let me be clear. I wish every school teacher in the nation had at least a masters degree and if giving them a bonus and a raise in pay will incentivize them to earn a masters degree then in the long run that's money well spent!

if they are going to get a masters degree, how about math, sciences or languages
 
if they are going to get a masters degree, how about math, sciences or languages
How about paying them what they would make out in the market place if they have a Masters Degree in those topics?

I was offered a teaching position with additional compensation for summer work that totaled a whooping $35,000/year. I would of had to take a $25,000 per year hit (and that didn't include my annual performance bonus either) and I was only making about the median income for someone with a Masters in my field.

This is not the issue here. You can have nothing but MIT engineers and Harvard MBA's teaching our kids and Einstein himself couldn't do squat to improve test scores in locations in which performance in the class room is not a highly stressed value by the parents in that community. Hell look at anti-intellectual reactionaries like Dixie. Do you think a box car full of Yale grads could improve the test scores of his little paste eaters?

I know all to well that most schools, particularly rural ones, if having to choose between paying market value for a qualified professional scientist/engineer or a successful basketball coach with a degree in faith healing to teach science, I know damned well who they would hire.

All this rightwing, anti-intellectual, anti-teachers rhetoric does is chase good people out of the education field.

Look, if you want to recruit and retain top notch professional people into education and you can do so by providing tuition reimbursement and a bonus for pursuing/obtaining a graduate degree, then that's money well spent. I know my company does it to recruit and retain top quality talent. Why is it an issue when we provide the same means for professional advancement for educators that are commonly provided in the market place for other professionals?

To me it just shows the low value and opinion the public has for professional educators. No wonder the best and the brightest aren't interested in entering the field.
 
Hey I respect lawn mower repairmen just like I respect hookers but I don't want one hired to teach sex ed nor do I really care about their opinion on education policy.

Dude I mean talking about lame. You're just a right wing nut who hasn't a clue. Well let me be clear. I wish every school teacher in the nation had at least a masters degree and if giving them a bonus and a raise in pay will incentivize them to earn a masters degree then in the long run that's money well spent!

But the fucking article debunks your notion, you idiot. It doesn't make a difference to the students. We are not in the business of hiring teachers to improve their lives. We hire them to teach our children.

So you are on record saying you agree that paying teachers more is a good idea despite getting nothing in return.
No wonder you're a liberal. You have no logic
 
How about paying them what they would make out in the market place if they have a Masters Degree in those topics?

I was offered a teaching position with additional compensation for summer work that totaled a whooping $35,000/year. I would of had to take a $25,000 per year hit (and that didn't include my annual performance bonus either) and I was only making about the median income for someone with a Masters in my field.

This is not the issue here. You can have nothing but MIT engineers and Harvard MBA's teaching our kids and Einstein himself couldn't do squat to improve test scores in locations in which performance in the class room is not a highly stressed value by the parents in that community. Hell look at anti-intellectual reactionaries like Dixie. Do you think a box car full of Yale grads could improve the test scores of his little paste eaters?

I know all to well that most schools, particularly rural ones, if having to choose between paying market value for a qualified professional scientist/engineer or a successful basketball coach with a degree in faith healing to teach science, I know damned well who they would hire.

All this rightwing, anti-intellectual, anti-teachers rhetoric does is chase good people out of the education field.

Look, if you want to recruit and retain top notch professional people into education and you can do so by providing tuition reimbursement and a bonus for pursuing/obtaining a graduate degree, then that's money well spent. I know my company does it to recruit and retain top quality talent. Why is it an issue when we provide the same means for professional advancement for educators that are commonly provided in the market place for other professionals?

To me it just shows the low value and opinion the public has for professional educators. No wonder the best and the brightest aren't interested in entering the field.
Beginning wages for teachers is low, true. However, the unions have negotiated so that later compensation is quite generous, especially in retirement. Had you been teaching from college then got your master's degree you would have had compensation to match how much people make in the "real world" which would actually grow and over time, as you neared retirement your compensation would actually be still larger than that.

It is largely a myth that teachers are under compensated, it simply takes a bit of patience...

Now, if they got rid of those increases due to such things there may be a difference for some period.
 
I don't think people will be happy till they find some way to teach paste eaters quantum physics by some teacher with a GED who works for minimum wage.

I mean lets ask a common sense question. Which is better for a school. To have teachers with more graduate degrees or less? To say studies have proven that more masters degrees doesn't translate to improved performance is missing the forest because of the trees.

Keep in mind that reading irrational shit like this is a large part of what keeps quality people out of education. Why in the fucking world would I take a pay cut so that I can have ignoramouses like Dixie and other arm chair quarter backs tell me how to do my job or what my salary should be and that my Masters isn't a consideration cause it doesn't directly correlate to student performance. OK well let me tell you something. My Masters degree isn't supposed to be a fucking measure of how students will perform. It's an indicator of how well I will perform and no matter how well I perform there's a good chance I'm not going to be able to teach your little paste eater QED in any meaninful fashion and I'll also tell you what my salary should be. It should be what the market will bear and if you want good people to teach your paste eating kids, well there aint no secret to that. You get what you pay for. I mean I got a $5000 bonus and a promotion with a raise in pay when I completed my Masters from my corporate employers, any of you want to bitch about that?

If the research says it doesn't work, it doesn't work. End of story.

My Masters degree isn't supposed to be a fucking measure of how students will perform. It's an indicator of how well I will perform

How students perform is the measure of how well a teacher performs.
 
I know all to well that most schools, particularly rural ones, if having to choose between paying market value for a qualified professional scientist/engineer or a successful basketball coach with a degree in faith healing to teach science, I know damned well who they would hire.

As the article stated, 90% of the teachers have degrees in education, not degrees in science or math. Education is basically a bullshit degree. I'd actually be interested isolating just those who have masters in real disciplines just to see if those with masters in bullshit disciplines are throwing things off.
 
Back
Top