Thursday, March 31, 2011

Keep up with CMS performance-pay controversy

The twists and turns of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools' push for teacher performance pay are generating questions from employees, parents and taxpayers. Here's a primer on keeping up.

To read the bill N.C. Rep. Ruth Samuelson introduced this week to give the CMS board authority to revise teacher pay and evaluations, click here. Note: The part about money is confusing. Superintendent Peter Gorman said it's supposed to indicate that CMS does not expect extra money but also does not expect to be penalized financially for taking this approach. He said it may need clarification.

To read the 2007 law that authorized performance-pay pilots, along with details of the CMS plan that won approval, click here for a state report.

To read questions about testing and performance pay submitted by Gorman's Teacher Advisory Commmittee, with adminstration responses in red type, click here.

To see a new CMS publication explaining all the tests students take, click here.

To see Gorman's video report on testing and teacher effectiveness sent to CMS employees this week, click here.

CMS has extensive reports on its own pay plan and performance pay elsewhere archived here.


CMSTeacher said...

CMS Quote from page 8 of the 2007 state document on PfP
"-We want to work with our employees to create this system of pay for performance.
-We want to approach this work in a thoughtful, deliberate way.
-We want to be truthful and transparent about our discussions"

These are apparently false, since CMS has now decided to pursue the "nuclear option" that allows them to bypass the state requirement that CMS teachers vote on whether or not to enact PfP.

From page 12:
"7. Teachers vote on new system.
As per the State, we will need a simple majority of our teachers to approve the new plan. Steps 1-6 are designed to ensure that teachers have shaped the design of a system they can support. Given these plans, we are looking to the State for stronger legislative support for our alternative compensation structure"

Another quote, from page 6:
"It will make it more likely that our highly effective teachers can provide for their families, send their children to college, and make Charlotte their home. They will be more likely to stay awhile." That is laughable, since most teachers are convinced that PfP is a way to pay teachers even LESS than they make now.

Anonymous said...

Recently at the PfP presentations at schools, Andy Baxter has told teachers that "they"(meaning Gorman) can TAKE the teacher supplement at any time WITHOUT legislative approval. If CMS had NO INTENTION of cutting teacher pay, Why would these "shove it down your throat" comments be made? Shouldn't the BOCC have a say in whether this confiscation of funds given to CMS specifically for teachers be used in this fashion?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Baxter has a unique way with "I don't know." It seems to be the foundation of his research, presentations, the future of CMS, and commentary on his bosses.

Anonymous said...

I remember years ago a pay for permance plan called ABC's were started in North Carolina. Teachers would get a bonus when the schools meet a certain criteria. What ever happened to that? Oh yeah... the state hasn't kept up their end of the bargain for several years. We need a real Union!