Oppenhagen Column: Doing what’s right for the children

» 1 Comment | Post a Comment

Several months ago, the School Board directed our Superintendent to investigate the possibility of merit pay for teachers. 

The directive, issued as it was during the final months of the Bush administration, was controversial. But now, in light of speeches made by Education Secretary Arne Duncan supporting merit pay for
teachers, the directive seems almost prescient. 

I was fortunate to be asked to serve on the task force for this directive. It has been a wonderful, interesting experience. The task force is composed of teachers, principals, and administrative people from
Independent Hill. 

I was a little wary at first, thinking that the meetings would end up being more contentious than collaborative.  But the people on the committee have taken this opportunity to be thoughtful, respectful, and
cooperative. Whether a workable plan can be found is still as yet undetermined, but I am confident we’re making every effort to find one.

Because our work has been under the radar, so to speak, it will seem as though whatever proposal gets put forward was done at the last minute, but it has not. Kris Peterson, a retired associate
superintendent, has spent months researching other efforts aimed at improving student performance. He crafted a proposal and put it before the committee, where intelligent debate has been taking
place. 

I mentioned when the directive was first put forth that before any work could be done on merit pay, a clear goal had to be established. Mr. Peterson has done just this. The goal of the pay proposal is not
to reward teachers for hard work.  All teachers work hard; that’s our job and we do it without expectation of higher reward.  The goal, rather, is to put the most effective teachers in front of the students who
need them most. 

If you have lived in the county for any amount of time, you have opinions of the schools.  There are the schools that you either send your child to or wish you could. 

And there are the schools that are OK. 

And then there are the schools you would do anything to keep your child from attending.

The reason behind your opinions has to do with how academically successful the school is as well as how the children act — it’s reputation. We look at the AYP (annual yearly progress) and
accreditation ratings of our schools. When most teachers apply for a position, they look for particular schools — the ones with the good reputations. It’s natural to want to do this — we want to be
successful in reaching our students and helping them learn. Few people want to make their work difficult. And the best teachers have the greatest number of choices.

The goal of the proposal to be sent to the School Board is to find a way to put the best teachers in front of the neediest students. This is probably the most important achievement that our school system
can and should strive for. 

It is also the most difficult one to support, since success won’t be measured in days or months but in years. And the benefit to each one of us isn’t direct but indirect. Getting the best teachers in front of
the neediest students gives those students the opportunities to succeed academically. 

Academic success leads to more choice in occupation, which leads to more financial success. People who are financially successful are able to be self-supportive. They are statistically less likely to be
unemployed, to be in jail, to be on the welfare rolls. They need fewer governmental resources, which in the long run will save us all from tax increases. 

I don’t think a crystal ball is needed to see that there is going to be public debate over this school board directive. There will be those who say whichever proposal is submitted isn’t fair — to teachers, to
children, to schools. 

And there will be those who feel we must do more. I agree with both. But there isn’t enough money right now. The economy is bad and money is tight. Does that mean we should wait until we can find the
perfect amount of money or the perfect plan? No. Each year, children are lost to us because they fall so far behind in school they can never catch up.

We need to stop that trend right here, right now. 

Whatever proposal is put forth, we must all promise to try to find some positives. And we must all promise to remember that the goal of this project — to put the best teachers in front of the neediest
students — benefits all of us eventually.

Let’s demonstrate to our children that we believe in what we say — education is the most important key to a successful future. And all children deserve the best education we can provide. 

Denise Oppenhagen is a longtime resident of Prince William County and can be reached at ’s columns will now be published on the editorial page every Saturday.

Advertisement

 
View More: No tags are associated with this article
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by pwcitizen on October 05, 2009 at 11:17 am

Placing the best teachers in front of the neediest students is certainly a commendable, albeit lofty goal. However, two critical elements are not taken into account. At a time when PWC employees are paid less than their Northern Virginia counterparts in other divisions, from what sustainable funding source will the incentives for these “best” teachers come? Additionally, how does such a plan, currently limited solely to classroom teachers address and reward the impact of resource teachers, librarians, guidance counselors, education support professionals, administrators, etc. All of these individuals play a significant part in an individual student’s academic life. Are they somehow less critical to the students’ potential for success?

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement