The first paragraph in this story by Advocate reporter Will Sentell doesn't get it quite right, although the rest of the article accurately portrays LFT's response to the report that a consultant recently gave the Blue Ribbon Commission studying teacher pay.
That consultant suggested cutting the teacher salary schedule by 10 percent, and claimed that teachers' advanced degrees and years of classroom experience don't improve student achievement.
The reporter's error is in equating our opposition to pay cuts to opposing supplements for teachers who take on additional tasks or agree to work in especially challenged schools. That's a distinction LFT simply has not made. Additional pay for such work can be a good idea, provided teachers have a voice in creating the plan.
Our beef was with consultants who claim that a) teachers stagnate after five years and b) there is no value in advanced degrees.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment