Ohio’s SB5 requires that teachers be paid according to a merit system. This requirement should inspire some thoughtful discussions.
SB5 gives local districts a choice of how they will define teacher merit.
The basis for judging merit is a clear understanding of how success is defined.
We have a good definition of what success in basketball means, and so, we have a fair basis upon which to judge the merit of a basketball player. An evaluation of a basketball player revolves around the question: To what degree does this player contribute to the success of the team? There is not a chance that someone who is an awful player could be mistaken for someone who is an excellent player. The definition of what success in basketball means ultimately is the basis for a merit system that determines the pay of professional basketball players.
The system of merit pay used to compensate professional basketball players could serve as a model for a system of merit used to compensate teachers if we could ever figure out what success in teaching should mean. As it is now, success in teaching is defined solely in terms of individual success within a system of schooling. The problem is, the system is wrong, seeking wrong aims, so the definition of success in the system is wrong as well. The merit of a teacher can be judged in a manner similar to how the merit of a professional basketball player is judged, only in the sense that the game of basketball parallels the game of schooling.
- Basketball, like all games, occurs in a small universe, controlled by a finite amount of specific regulations. The “object of the game” is narrowly defined.
- Schooling also occurs in a small universe, also controlled by a finite amount of specific regulation and again, the “object of the game” is narrowly defined.
The problem is, substituting schooling for education is a bad idea and schooling, as presently defined, is miserably failing to produce the effective and thoughtful citizens our nation needs.
SB5 shows a fork in the path, two roads diverging. We are on the wide and easy path of schooling and we deceive ourselves into thinking we have “excellent” schools because, according to a bureaucratic process, we are winners in the game of schooling. But SB5 opens the opportunity for local control to redefine the game. Here are our choices:
- We stay on the path we are now: Public education accelerates its alignment with corporate interests and becomes ever more effective in serving its corporate overlords.
- We take the road less traveled: Public education creates a transformed system, one whose purpose is defined as effective, self-actualized citizens, prepared and happy to advance the common good of our society.
Last summer, the Kettering school leadership studied an interesting new book, Frederick Hess’s, “Education Unbound: The Promise and Practice of Greenfield Schooling.” On the cover of the book is a picture of an open green field. Hess’s theme is that we must transform the system of education and that the first step is to clear out the bramble and debris and create green space for new development. I read the book and made this response: “To Bring Excellence To Public Education We Must First Engineer A Better System.”
SB5 clears out the bramble. The question is, what do we do with the “greenfield” it created. It seems to me, Hess’s wants to open public education to corporate America to use as a big profit opportunity.
My thought is that green space should be an opportunity for an engaged democracy to exert local control. In the book I am researching, “Public Education In Kettering Ohio In 2030,” I imagine that a prosperous community determines to take path #2, and successfully creates a system design that empowers their success.
I keep remembering W. Edwards Deming’s words, “Profound knowledge is required.”
The challenge for Peggy Lehner, my local state senator, recently designated chair of the Senate Education Committee, is to show leadership in bringing profound knowledge into this discussion about school reform. SB5 should energize discussions about the purpose of public education and about how the system of public education should best be designed to best accomplish that purpose. Questions Senator Lehner’s committee should investigate:
- What is the aim of Ohio’s system of public education?
- What are the possible system designs that a local district might implement that could accomplish this aim?
- How should teacher professionalism be defined?
- What is the system that would empower and reward ever more professional teachers?
- What is a merit system that would work to make Ohio’s system of public education most effective
SB5 should energize discussions about the purpose of public education and about how the system of public education should best be designed to best accomplish that purpose.
SB5 is not in Senator Lehner’s committee. The SB5 timeline does not permit exploration of topics that former Governor Strickland failed to address in four years.
Questions Senator Lehner’s committee should investigate:
1. What is the status of Ohio public education regarding compliance with applicable human rights treaties?
2. Can Deming’s System of Profound Knowledge help address ongoing non-compliance?
3. How and when will compliance be achieved?
Now there’s an agenda worthy of an oath-sworn public official!
[Prompt to aid understanding: compare and contrast how the 3-question agenda and the 5-question agenda relate to the duties and responsibilities of elected officeholders (especially general assembly members).]
Eric, SB5 requires that local districts implement a merit based pay system for teachers and therefore opens the door to major structural change in Ohio’s system of public education. It seems to me that the Senate Education Committee should choose to show leadership to help local districts think through the complicated matters SB5 is forcing them to deal with.
I’d like to understand the issue of “non-compliance” that you refer to. I don’t have a clue.
local districts implement a merit based pay system for teachers and therefore opens the door …
Certainly doesn’t open the door to Deming.
…non-compliance…
Google this: “Civil Rights and Human Rights in the Obama Era”
Eric, It would be interesting to know more about Deming’s view of compensation, say, at Ford Motor. I’m wondering: how would Deming think the best engineers at Ford should emerge to be given more responsibility and more pay, and could there be any application of the Ford system to a public education system?
The simple idea I get from Deming is that organizational structure and system design account for 85% of quality. Deming would disagree with the notion that teacher quality is the most important factor in determining the success of the system, and instead would urge us to redesign the system.
The question of teacher merit — how to define it, how to reward it — is a question so big that its solution is beyond the scope of current bureaucratic processes that are available. I’m wondering if the question of teacher merit pay might serve as a big push for overall system reform.
Here is the question: What is teacher professionalism and what is the system that most effectively empowers and rewards teacher professionalism?
What is teacher professionalism and what is the system that most effectively empowers and rewards teacher professionalism?
Instead of paying lip service to systems, why not let teachers budget their own buildings and hire the building administrators. If student achievement measured by test score improvement isn’t an acceptable measure of quality, how about this:
http://www.nist.gov/baldrige/publications/education_criteria.cfm
Unlike basketball players, there’s no money to overpay teachers. Education professionals need to get professional results and play in the professional leagues. It’s not enough to say “I’m a trained professional” and walk away from realities that prevent professional results.
When teachers take ownership of their own schools and address student achievement issues (and get the required support and partnership) they will have demonstrated professionalism.
Eric, you state Senator Lehner’s committee should ask: “1. What is the status of Ohio public education regarding compliance with applicable human rights treaties?” What exactly do you have in mind? Do you think school systems are not meeting such treaties? If so, how have they failed?
Some question the legality of school district borders, say, between Dayton and Oakwood. (Imagine the United Nations taking Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson seriously.)
Look here:
http://organize.ussf2010.org/ws/civil-rights-and-human-rights-obama-era-convention-elimination-racial-discrimination-cerd
And this too:
“The treaty aims to ensure equality in enjoyment of rights which range from classic civil and political rights like voting and equal treatment before tribunals to economic and social rights like the rights to housing, education and access to public accommodations.7 It also aims to eliminate racist propaganda;8 end racial segregation;9 provide judicial recourse for wrongs;10 and ensure that States proactively educate to promote un- derstanding and to end racism.11 All 173 states that have ratified ICERD are obligated under it to comply with all of these points, and more.
7. [International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,] art. 5.
8. Id. art. 4.
9. Id. art. 3.
10. Id. art. 6.
11. Id. art. 7.
…
The opportunity to present issues of race in the U.S. across boundaries at the U.N. has been groundbreaking. Using the international human rights framework and mechanisms to advocate for change has expanded the fight against discrimination and oppression and has taken the battle for equality to a new level of sophistication, finding new allies and using new strategies. Malcolm X would be proud.”