麻豆精品

Last month, Newark鈥檚 school district and local teachers union agreed on a that eliminates a key part of one of the most ambitious, and tumultuous, education reform overhauls of the past decade: merit pay for teachers. The uncommon alignment of three factors 鈥� state control of Newark schools, energetic support from then-Mayor Cory Booker and then-Gov. Chris Christie, and $200 million in philanthropy led by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg 鈥� brought hope that Newark could radically reimagine teacher pay by aligning compensation with student success. This game-changing chance at reform, announced on The Oprah Winfrey Show and celebrated in national media institutions like , brought unions on board and established merit pay to Newark.

Less than 10 years later, all three ingredients that fueled those reforms have gone away, and now, so has merit pay. Instead, Newark is retreating to the same system it had before: paying teachers based on their highest academic degree and years of experience. In other words, it鈥檚 out with the new and in with the old. In doing so, Newark鈥檚 union and district leaders have chosen to return to a pay system poorly aligned with student learning goals and closed the door on building one that works for students and teachers.

Under Newark鈥檚 merit pay contract, part of teachers鈥� compensation was linked to their performance ratings, with highly effective educators receiving of up to $5,000 鈥� and even more money available for teachers in hard-to-staff subjects or struggling schools. Low-performing teachers would not see any raises. Automatic salary increases for all advanced degrees were abandoned for one-time bonuses for completing approved programs.

Did it work? It鈥檚 impossible to say definitively, but Newark made progress. Reading and math scores have risen, and more importantly for the logic behind merit pay, over 97 percent of high-performing teachers were , compared with just 54 percent of ineffective teachers. Researchers cannot conclude that the merit pay system caused those improvements, perhaps in part because of how few teachers were impacted: Less than 1 in 10 鈥渉ighly effective鈥� teaching bonuses, and the same tiny proportion were denied raises for poor performance. However, while it鈥檚 hard to confirm that merit pay in Newark definitely worked, it鈥檚 clear that returning to lockstep increases for experience and pay based on a teacher鈥檚 highest degree definitely doesn鈥檛.

The problem with giving all teachers regular raises regardless of performance and awarding automatic salary bumps of $1,000 for master鈥檚 degrees and $2,000 for doctorates 鈥� bonuses that will double next year 鈥� is that it ignores the that low-quality teachers can durably harm students, while high-quality teachers can produce gains for students in school and beyond. Beyond that, it is clear that graduate degrees are 听听. As Matt Chingos of the Urban Institute , 鈥淭he fact that teachers with master鈥檚 degrees are no more effective in the classroom, on average, than their colleagues without advanced degrees is one of the most consistent findings in education research.鈥�

Without the energy, or attention, that opened the door to merit pay, Newark鈥檚 district and union leadership have abandoned the possibility of refining and improving a system that considered student outcomes first in favor of guaranteeing outcomes for teachers.

The union celebrated the return to the old system, , 鈥淭his contract removes the last vestiges of corporate reform from the district. No more renew schools, no more performance pay. This contract is a message to our enemies that your evil is not welcome in Newark or any other public schools.鈥�

That鈥檚 rich, given that the union was all in favor of merit pay when it came with $31 million in back pay. Union chief Joseph Del Grosso latched onto that deal, later , 鈥淲e had an opportunity to get Zuckerberg鈥檚 money.鈥� Which explains why 62 percent of the union at the time endorsed the new contract 鈥� merit pay and all.

The union overwhelmingly embraced 鈥渃orporate reform鈥� when doing so served its interests. Now, having pocketed the money, it is celebrating the dismantling of the last, and arguably biggest, piece of Newark鈥檚 reforms. In the process, the bold opportunity to reimagine teacher pay has met an end with no imagination at all.

What is lost in this whimper of an ending isn鈥檛 the 鈥渞ight鈥� set of education reforms; reformers in Newark circa 2010 certainly didn鈥檛 get everything right out of the gate. Rather, it鈥檚 the opportunity to get it right that was lost. Newark had a once-in-a-lifetime chance to remake teacher pay, but rather than building and improving on that system, it retreated to a system that is not likely to benefit the city鈥檚 children.

Nat Malkus is the deputy director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. R.J. Martin is a research assistant at AEI.听

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 麻豆精品鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.