They are politically tough to eliminate, not correlated with teacher effectiveness outside the math and science fields, and generally unaligned with districts鈥� priorities for professional development.
Nevertheless, salary differentials for teachers who earn additional course credits or hold advanced degrees鈥攐therwise known as 鈥渓ane鈥� increases or the 鈥渕aster鈥檚 degree bump鈥濃�攁re among the costliest aspects of teacher development.
鈥淚t is so depressing, I have to say,鈥� Paul B. Ash, the superintendent of the 6,300-student Lexington, Mass., school system, said of the cost. 鈥淵ou have to pay teachers what they鈥檙e worth, ... but the issue for me is whether that鈥檚 the best way to spend money to increase teacher capacity to increase learning. Is it? I don鈥檛 think so.鈥�
| Professional Development: Sorting Through the Jumble to Achieve Success | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
An analysis released by the , located at the University of Washington, in Bothell, found that states spend millions of dollars paying teachers for earning extra credentials, even in fields like education or leadership that research does not associate with improved student learning.
As professional-development spending comes under the spotlight, a conceptual challenge awaits: Should those costs be considered and budgeted as part of spending on teacher professional development, or be reserved for a larger conversation on teacher pay?
Karen Hawley Miles, the president of Education Resource Strategies, a nonprofit organization that conducts analyses of district spending patterns, argues that such costs should be included in reviews of district spending on professional development, since they represent an investment in teachers鈥� knowledge and skills. In Philadelphia, her Newton, Mass.-based group found, the increments made up nearly 40 percent of total dollars invested in teacher training in 2007-08, outpacing even the amount spent on teacher coaching and in-service workshops.
Other finance experts aren鈥檛 convinced those costs should be budgeted as professional development. Allan R. Odden, a professor of educational leadership and policy analysis at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, points out that private industries often compensate their employees more for earning degrees like M.B.A.s and for advanced certification.
These mini-profiles鈥攊ncluding video interviews鈥攁re meant to provide insight, but not to serve as representative examples of the districts in which they teach or programs in question. Their diverse experiences highlight the challenges districts face in providing high-quality training matched to each teacher鈥檚 needs.
鈥淣o private-sector company would consider increased salary for knowledge and skills in their training budget; that would be in their salary budget,鈥� he argued. A more productive goal for districts would be to revamp the entire pay schedule, rather than tinker with just lane increases, Mr. Odden added.
Despite a resurgence of interest in alternative-pay plans, most districts have only gone so far as to offer bonuses on top of the salary schedule. Just a few have ever attempted to put in totally new compensation systems.
That鈥檚 the primary reason that Mr. Ash, in Massachusetts, hasn鈥檛 attempted to tackle the issue.
鈥淚t鈥檚 hard in every way鈥攊t鈥檚 intellectually hard, it鈥檚 politically hard, it requires an enormous amount of persistence,鈥� he said about changing the tradition of lane salary boosts.
Return to the main story,
鈥淵ou鈥檙e trying to overcome 80 years of history, 鈥� and in the meantime, you鈥檙e paying for those courses forever.鈥�
