—Broad salary bands—Create “benchmarks” based on years of experience, but leave a lot of flexibility on either side of that benchmark. So for example, the benchmark for a starting teacher might be 50k, plus or minus 5k, whereas the five year benchmark might be 55k, +/- 5k, the ten year mark 60, +/- 5k, up to the 20 year mark of 70k.
The scale depends on the market and the school’s resources. But I believe we should make it as wide as possible, starting with the lowest salary necessary to secure a young teacher and the highest possible on the back end. When young people join us, they can afford the low wages. But after marriage and kids, our salaries don’t keep pace with their exploding expenses. We lose a lot of talented teachers in their late 20’s, right when they’re hitting their stride!
The wider our scale, the faster we can accelerate salaries. It’s a mistake to raise salaries by focusing on the entry salary, pushing everything up from there. Rather, we should focus on widening step increases.
—Teachers as “Partners”—In law firms, new lawyers are “associates” who receive annual salaries. But after 8 years or so (it varies by firm), if chosen, they can become “partners” (owners, really) who share in the company profits. At year end, the firm distributes its revenue over expense to the partners depending on their “share.” Junior partners own a tinier portion of the firm than senior partners. If they are not chosen to become partners within a certain window, they leave.
How might this work in our schools? Full disclaimer: I’ve never done this. But what if our Council designated a certain number—let’s say, 30K– that if our school had a good year, with revenues exceeding expense by 30k or more, we would “revenue share” that 30k with our “partner” teachers, in addition to their salaries? We would have to set up some rigorous requirements for becoming “partners,” just as law firms do. But it would be a way to incentivize and reward long time teachers.
—More intermediate leadership positions-We typically only have two “levels” of leadership: assistant principals and principals. We may have talented teachers whom we’d like to pay more, but don’t have “positions” that justify the bumps they need for us to do so.
For large schools with multiple classrooms per grade, I like the idea of “lead teachers” for each grade, with extra curricular responsibilities.
I’ve known many small schools, led by beleaguered principals in need of admin help, but without the means to hire an AP. I’ve recommended they segment as K-2, 3-5, 6-8 “units” and then appoint a teacher as “unit leader” for each. They can then give these teachers a substantial bump in salaries for their additional responsibilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment