One of my colleagues has a giant wooden clothes pin on her desk, which she jokingly claims she uses when she has to hold her nose to vote for a bill. Last week I voted for SF 277 because it raises teacher salaries by $145 million over the next two years — but some of the policy provisions in the bill made me feel as though I needed to use that clothes pin.
I had three major problems with the bill: it shifts power away from the local school board and gives it to the local teacher’s union; it creates new mandates that may force school districts to seek extra property taxes for salaries; and it makes it more difficult to remove ineffective teachers and does little to reward good teachers. Republicans offered amendments that would have addressed all of these concerns, but they were denied.
The 2001 Legislature passed major legislation to address teacher quality and student achievement. The purpose of the law was to raise teacher salaries, particularly for beginning teachers. The law also instituted several policy changes. In an attempt to move away from the pay schedule and to professionalize the teaching profession, the first two steps in a career ladder system were defined and funded. A greater emphasis on professional development and teacher evaluations were required, with an ultimate goal of having an effective teacher in every classroom.
The 2001 legislation stopped short of defining and funding the last two steps in the career ladder. Although the program has received increased funding every year since 2001, flat state revenues prevented the Legislature from fully implementing and funding the career ladder program. A better revenue picture allowed the 2007 Legislature to prioritize raising teacher pay to around 25th in the nation — something upon which both parties campaigned.
The law passed in 2001 required that if a teacher’s evaluation showed the teacher to be low-performing, that teacher would be limited only to a cost of living salary increase. SF 277 strikes that provision. Current law allows school boards and administrators to determine how low-performing teachers should be evaluated and how to best provide them with intensive assistance. Under SF 277, that process will be part of collective bargaining. Finally, current law allows school boards the ability to offer Market Factor Pay dollars to fund higher salaries to attract teachers in shortage areas. SF 277 would allow Market Factor Pay dollars to be subject to collective bargaining.
For the first time, SF 277 provides for an unfunded mandate that schools have a school nurse for every 750 students and a guidance counselor for every 350 students. If a school district does not have money or cash reserves to hire the extra personnel, it must go before the School Budget Review Committee to request permission to levy additional property taxes. While Iowa law allows this extra levying for other unusual or unexpected circumstances, in the past it has not been allowed for ongoing salary expenses.
Rather than fully implement the remainder of the career ladder, the bill provides for eight two-year pilot projects. It also allows for two pay-for-performance pilots. The Democrats claim there is no evidence the career ladder or teacher pay-for- performance initiatives are effective, thus the need for the pilots. This is in spite of the fact that the Institute for Tomorrow’s Workforce has researched the effectiveness of these concepts for two years and has recommended their full implementation. (The ITW spent millions of your tax dollars to determine this.) SF 277 states implementation of a statewide career ladder is contingent upon a “sufficiency of funds” at the end of the two year period. It’s hard for me to imagine how SF 277’s infusion of another $145 million dollars over the next two years would not be a sufficient amount if it were the priority of the Democrats to ensure teacher quality and accountability along with the increased money.
I voted for this bill because I know the majority of teachers in my community are top notch and I wanted them to know their dedication to their profession is appreciated. However, the policies in this bill send a message that is discouraging to teachers. The message is: work hard to be the best teacher you can be, and you will get the same as everyone else — there is no reward. The implementation of a career ladder would have allowed excellence in teaching to be rewarded and would have given teachers an incentive to become better teachers today than they were yesterday. Hopefully we will see these changes made in the future.
Please feel free to contact me in any of the following ways:
E-mail: carmine.boal@legis.state.ia.us
www.voteboal.com
Home Address: 3301 SW Timber Green Road, Ankeny
Home Phone: 964-3335