Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Denver teacher contract pumps money into the right places

Rocky Mountain News

Published August 27, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

Without question, a major selling point in the pending agreement between Denver Public Schools and the Denver Classroom Teachers Association is its duration. By coming to terms on a three-year contract - the first time in nearly two decades that the district and the union could seal a pact lasting more than one year - both sides could avoid the tiresome and counterproductive annual ritual pitting management against union leaders. In these acrimonious battles, the children and their parents usually lost.

That said, a three-year agreement that was either fiscally irresponsible or failed to tie more teacher compensation to student growth would have been no bargain at all.

Given the current economic climate, the deal is very generous indeed. The average teacher in the ProComp performance-pay system can expect a 15 percent raise. And yet the more we learn about the substance of the agreement, the more we believe it satisfies several important educational goals.

First, it dramatically increases the incentives available under ProComp. Several key bonuses for early and mid-career teachers will more than double, from $1,000 to $2,345 a year each. These incentives reward teachers who choose difficult-to- teach subjects, work in hard-to-staff schools and whose students improve in the classroom.

In that regard, a new incentive will be available to teachers in the schools ranking in the top 50 percent in growth of student achievement.

These changes will ensure that, compared with the existing agreement, much more money provided by the ProComp mill-levy will wind up with top-performing teachers and not sit in the bank.

ProComp will work a lot more like the program that was initially endorsed by DPS and the union and sold to voters.

Next, it would allow the district to redirect salaries and incentives to early and mid-career teachers, who have often chosen suburban school districts over Denver. Average starting salaries would rise from $37,000 to $42,000. ProComp incentives can quickly boost those amounts, letting teachers who take on tough challenges and succeed be rewarded for their efforts.

So yes, the pact offers generous raises for all teachers - 3 percent for the just-started school year, and at least 0.25 percent above the local Consumer Price Index for the final two years.

Meanwhile, beginning with the second year of the agreement, so-called base-building elements - the dollars that remain part of a teacher's permanent salary - would be capped after the 13th year of employment. Teachers who work longer would continue to get cost-of-living increases. And of course veteran teachers will earn full benefits from the pension system, which puts most private sector retirement plans to shame.

Union members and the school board must still ratify the pact by Sept. 9, though the latter is a near certainty.

We hope the rank-and-file will embrace this deal, too, and have been encouraged that more than 200 teachers, union and non-union, recently launched a Web site (denverteachersforchange.org) urging the union to settle with the district and abandon the bellicose rhetoric it had employed in recent months.

Once the agreement takes effect, teachers and administrators will have three years to focus on the kids, rather than next year's contract talks. Students should clearly benefit as a result.

Comments

  • August 27, 2008

    6 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    woodwose writes:

    Thomas Sowell recently brought up a very good point about the teaching bureaucracy in this country. They are supposedly professionals with all these certifications and degrees, yet students that are homeschooled by amatuers regularly do better than students taught in public schools.

    In any other endeavor this would be considered completely bizare, you wouldn't expect an amatuer surgeon to pick up a knife and operate on someone with better results than a professional surgeon. Even a professional mechanic does a better job, most of the time, than the "shade tree" mechanic down the street.

    Why is it, that professional, union-certfied and represented teachers, with their fresh degrees in Education from our leftist ruled colleges fare so poorly compared to amatuer homeschool teachers?

    Sure homeshool teachers have some advantages, they actually care about their students as only a parent can, and only usually teach their own children.

    But, it doesn't change the fact that maybe, just maybe a lot of the garbage that the unions and administrators do to force certifications and degrees in education for teachers are nothing but a load of garbage designed to make it difficult for people to become teachers. This is called a "barrier to entry" and it's designed to create a shortage of teachers so that it's easier to jack up their pay.

  • August 27, 2008

    6:32 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    ItsJustme writes:

    I guess I still don't understand. How will raising the salaries of the same teachers result in improvement in the school system? Have they been holding out in the practice of their skills all this time until they get the proper "incentive" to really do their best? That's illogical and counterintuitive. And how will a higher starting salary draw a different class of new teachers? Will the ones who, by this rationale, are mediocore now say "Well that's too high a salary for me now. I'll go into a different career field." And the ones who would be better teachers, but were going into private industry will now say "Oh wow, DPS is paying an extra $1000 dollars to beginning teachers. I think I'll work for them now." No, in fact, exactly the same people will go into the teaching field that would have even if the starting salary remained the same. It. Changes. Nothing.

  • August 27, 2008

    7:01 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    tjason11 writes:

    The reason to increase starting salaries and existing salaries is to keep qualified teachers as teachers. Too many of them have left the teaching industry because they don't make enough to support themselves or their families and have quickly realized that their peers who have Masters and PHDs are making $20K to $30K more in the private sector. It doesn't matter if it's a teacher or any other job, to keep your best tallent you have to pay a bit more to keep them, otherwise when they realize they can make more somewhere else they usually will leave.

    As for the home schooled idea, I would love to know where you got your data from. Are you comparring home schooled kids in only Colorado, is this a national average or a regional average. I have never heard of home schooled kids doing better on average than kids in public or private schools.

  • August 27, 2008

    8:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    vendari01 writes:

    "TANSTAAFL- There ain't no such thing as a free lunch". Robert Heinlein had it right: you have to pay for what you want. You want a better quality of educator, you need to pay him or her a decent wage. This is something I am willing to pay for.

  • August 27, 2008

    9:58 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    mmannino writes:

    Hold your wallets. This contract will substantially increase compensation costs for the school district with little benefit. I could support some of these provisions if the backloaded compensation structure was reformed.

    The problem with teacher compensation is the tremendous amounts of backloaded compensation (pensions and early retiree medical care). DPS and other school districts have input oriented compensation structures determined by seniority, higher education degrees, and continuing education credits. This structure still remains in place although it is augmented with some performance oriented incentives.

    Now we have high starting salaries and incredible amounts of backloaded compensation. In addition, the contract has a cost of living kicker. Across the board raises above the local CPI for the last two years of the contract.

    If you doubt that teachers (as well as all school district employees) have large amounts of pension compensation, consider the average retirement age. The average retirement age is about 57 years with 75% of highest average salary (computed over the highest 36 monthes of wages). In addition, retirees receive annual cost of living increases. This retirement package represents more than $650,000 additional compensation at retirement age for the typical teacher. We are effectively giving teachers a lump sum of $650,000 so that they can retire at much younger ages than the normal retirement age (65).

    DPS budget problems are due to pensions and competition from other schools (charter, private, home school). This contract will magnify long term DPS budget problems. Get ready for substantial bond levy increases.

  • August 27, 2008

    12:34 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ItsJustme writes:

    Here you go TJason11, a peer reviewed study. I'm sure there are more. This is just the first one I ran across. Check out table 3.3:

    http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v7n8/

    "It is readily apparent from Table 3.3 that the median scores for home school students are well above their public/private school counterparts in every subject and in every grade."

  • August 27, 2008

    12:47 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    FreeToChoose writes:

    It sounds like Mr Bennett won his points.

    And while I'm sure he would have wanted even more freedom to pack incentives into hard-to-fill positions, he played the cards dealt him as well as could be expected. He has proven to be a valuable resource for Denver Public Schools and an excellent advocate for the students and parents he serves.

    I hope he continues to find avenues to serve the public, but for now, we have one fine DPS boss!!!

    Congrats Mr Bennett, WELL DONE!

  • August 27, 2008

    2:38 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ksells writes:

    It's a fact that school districts get what they pay for. Low paying districts see their best teachers move to districts that pay better and have better working conditions. Denver is not a great place for teachers based on wages and work conditions. Denver pays less then many school districts in the region, much less other states.

    The Mike Rosen mentality completely blinds people that, yes, home schooling can increase scores (based on a one to one teacher/student ratio) although there are serious social drawbacks. Private schools would be great, but does anyone really believe that tax dollars given away to people who already can afford them is enough for people will be enough for people who just get by? Private schools cost much more then public schools because the teacher to student ration is much lower and the they spend much more on teaching tools. Public schools were created for the purpose of teaching the masses at an economical price. The teachers are there because of dedication.

    As far as compensation for teachers is concerned, teachers are very underpaid considering the education level they need to obtain to advance. The Mike Rosens of the world only think that teachers are ignorant and greedy people who hang on to their job because they can't get one elsewhere. A teacher gets paid based on advanced learning. Actually, somewhat more then Mike Rosen.

  • August 27, 2008

    3:23 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ItsJustme writes:

    ksells, I'm not sure what Mike Rosen has to do with this, but from his bio "Mike Rosen hosts Denver's most popular local radio talk show on 850 KOA. He holds an MBA degree from the University of Denver, was a corporate finance executive at Samsonite and Beatrice Foods, served as Special Assistant for Financial Management to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy at the Pentagon." A beginning public school teacher needs and usually has no more that a BA and a certificate. So your statement " A teacher gets paid based on advanced learning. Actually, somewhat more then Mike Rosen" is incorrect.

  • August 27, 2008

    6:01 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    ksells writes:

    Itsjustme,

    Well, an MBA is a nice fluff degree. But really, does an MBA have much merit now? There's plenty of them that set up Enron, Global Crossings, Morten Andersen, and Qwest. All it is is taking a few extra courses where merit by doing doesn't apply to effort. Samsonite went out of business for all intents and purposes im the US so what is your point? As a matter of fact, teachers do have to start with a BA. And they have to prove themselves without having a button that automatically drops any conversation that interferes with anything that Rosen disagrees with. Teachers don't get a raise by praising the Republican party's line. I might point out that Rosen has spent years talking about how pathetic McBush is and all of a sudden he's the next best thing to sliced bread.

    The point about Rosen is that he has for years stated that public school teachers are incompetent and overpaid. He, as a vassal of the right wing (and of couse the big pay check), has used unions, specifically, the unions representing teachers, as something as the anti-Christ. He knows who signs his checks. The Mile High Employment council really loves him.

  • August 27, 2008

    7:50 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    BetterEducated writes:

    When I first heard about ProComp years ago, I had the same thought ItsJustMe voiced (way) above: the suggestion is that (a) teachers are responsible for success in the classroom so that (b) it is their fault kids are not doing better and (c) they would improve if motivated better.
    I don't necessarily agree with any of it. Sure I realize a crummy teacher shouldn't be there but honestly, I can't say I always performed up (or down) to what my teachers deserved; I believe that some circumstances are so difficult that teachers can't make nearly as much of a dent as in other situations; and they are typically not money-oriented people to begin with, so as earlier stated they aren't likely to get too excited about even as much as $5000 in bonuses.
    "What a girl wants, what a girl needs...." is not quite as superficial as that (with apologies to the gentlemen teachers who may be reading!). It's exactly what their signs said it was during the rally: "Respect."
    One of those things you either have in a relationship...or not. :-)

  • August 28, 2008

    9:27 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    mmannino writes:

    ksells,

    Public school teachers as a whole are not under compensated. If they under compensated, there would problems in hiring. Most school districts do not have trouble hiring. The opposite is true. There are many qualified people wanting a position who cannot get hired. There are some schools (such as inner city schools) and disciplines (high school science and math) in which shortages may occur.

    The reason that there is no shortage of teachers is because the compensation level is above the market clearing price. When you account for total compensation (salary, benefits, vacation, retirement benefits, and job security), the conclusion is clear. Retirement compensation alone inflates a career teacher's compensation 40% to 50%.

    Teacher compensation is heavily backloaded. The beginning teacher needs to work much harder than the experienced teacher. Starting salaries are somewhat low but the salaries grow steadily so that experienced teachers have high compensation. Reform of teacher compensation should reform both beginning teacher compensation and career teacher compensation. However, the contract improved beginning teacher compensation but did not reform career teacher compensation. The contract will substantially increase compensation costs with little benefit.

    Teacher compensation should be modeled after university professor compensation. University professors do not have collective bargaining although there are many rules about professor work obligations. University professors do not have defined benefit pensions. Hence university professors retire later. Market conditions have a big impact on professor compensation. Disciplines without high demand have lower compensation than other disciplines. Starting compensation is aligned with market conditions.

  • August 28, 2008

    12:07 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    FreeToChoose writes:

    mmannino:
    The only problem with your points is that DPS MUST deal with a Union, so comparing this deal to the market clearing mechanism in college professors is a useless exercise. The teachers union wants the contract backloaded while Mr Bennett wanted more freedom to compensate younger teachers and harder to fill positions. Personally, I think math and science teachers in general should be paid MUCH more since their skill sets are in higher demand outside the public school system than, say, art or english teachers. But that's not the way unions work. Given the parameters within which Mr Bennett had to work, he got a fair deal for the teachers and students.

    Is it the best deal for the students? Probably not, but the union wasn't about to allow the overpaid english teachers or 18 year veterans to get left behind either... and that's just the way we, as a society, have set up the system.

  • August 30, 2008

    12:16 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Splint writes:

    Well my much longer post just got wiped out by the page auto refreshing or something to that effect. Lucky you! It was probably too boring to read anyway.

    The argument about home school and public school is not “apples to apples.” Arriving at the statistics needs much more consideration than some of you are giving.

    Home schools are a 1-1 or 1-2 classroom setting. Sometimes the student ratio may increase but nowhere near 1-25 or 1-30 as is the ratio in many public school classrooms. The study posted by “ItsJustme” looked at 20,760 students in 11,930 families which averages 1.74 students per home school. Training or no training it is considerably easier to teach one kid who you devote all of your time to than it is to teach twenty-five with whom you split your time.

    Teachers don’t have the ability to follow all of their students home every night to make sure homework is done. Home school educators by definition are already home to do just that. Students in home schools don’t often get home to find their parents leaving for the night shift. Public school teachers on the other hand get seven hours to see students and then the day is over. The time and attention simply isn’t the same in each case.

    The Rudner study stated that many home school families are married couples with a higher median household income compared to the national average. The years the medians were taken are a little skewed in the study, but the difference was that home school families made $16,000 more on average. Also, the home school families are predominantly White to the tune of 94% with only 1% being Black or Hispanic. Basically it’s like comparing an affluent suburban school to a poor inner city school.

    Lastly, if anyone wants to use the Rudner study then it should be read more carefully. Rudner states very clearly, “Because this was not a controlled experiment, the study does not demonstrate that home schooling is superior to public or private schools and the results must be interpreted with caution.” Here I would like to point out that the tests were administered by home school parents who had the answer key. Home schooling is a hot political issue that home school educators would very much like to win. For a little anecdote, I personally know a parent who home schools her son and admittedly gets fed up with his whining and just does the work for him and mails it in to the state. While this may not happen very often, I think it’s important to note because statistics are not always what they seem to be due to many variables.

    Simply put, yes home school education produces kids who are very capable of passing tests. However, comparing home school education to public school education in this arena leads to results that are not only unfounded, but utterly unrealistic and extremely biased.

  • August 30, 2008

    12:13 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    neiman11 writes:

    An open voucher system would actually let public schools and private schools compete and be evaluated. How is this wrong for the students. If we care about kids and their education instead of the teachers union we might find some solutions.