In the battle for better K-12 education in America, the endless back-and-forth between teachers and school districts goes something like this. Teachers demand higher wages, schools demand linking it to higher performance, and both sides hit a wall. But something remarkable happened in Newark this month. A deal.
In early November, the teachers of Newark voted in favor of a new contract agreement where teachers rated "highly effective" in hard-to-staff areas would receive an annual $12,500 bonus. It is a more comprehensive plan than similar programs in places like Denver or Washington, D.C., and it represents a major shift away from the traditional union opposition to merit pay.
More here.
Apt. 11d 
“Henig also points out that the Zuckerberg money reduced the stakes in this fight, since new bonus money would not be taken from other areas in the budget. Del Grasso was confident that foundations and other philanthropic organizations would continue to provide money for this program, when the Zuckerberg money was gone.”
This seems to be the most important point. Is there a cap on how many teachers can be rated as “highly effective”? If not, that’s great, and is especially important for the schools where nobody wants to teach, but I can’t imagine it’s a sustainable model. Who are these philanthropic organizations that are going to give millions of dollars to public schools? Almost every other school system is working with a budget that would have to be adjusted to add what is probably something like 20 percent (or more) to the average “efficient” teacher’s salary.
This is also likely to contribute to the battles parents conduct to get their kid into a particular classroom, and whereas before there was nothing quantifiable about the teachers’ skills, now there will be. If a child has only a “partially effective” teacher one year, does she have the right to a “highly effective” one the next?
LikeLike