I think that the acquisition of an advanced degree for educators is about much more than pay raises and braggign rights. As educators we try to instill the importance of life long learning and continuing education in all of our students. The same should apply to our professional practice. I have taught with teachers who came into the profession with great ideas and after several years became stale and routine, reteaching the same old lessons. I know that when I went back and received my M.Ed. I learned a lot that I quickly implemented into the classrrom and it positively affected my practice and in turn my students learning.

I do think that teachers should be paid at higher levels based on their education because lets face it, we don’t get paid a lot as it is. If you want to entice someone to go back and further their education, $$ is probably the best way.

The biggest problem that I have with merit pay is that in big school districts the dynamics of students can change dramitically across the district.

I use to teach in a district that was primarily title 1 on the south end of the district and mostly affluent neighborhoods on the north side. As an educator I know there is a direct relationship between title 1 schools and standardized test scores (which is what teachers success rates are evaluated on). It’s hard to say that the teacher who teaches in a classroom full of children who come from affluent homes is a better teacher because their children score higher on tests. It also has to do with resources at home (parental education levels also predict how well a student will perform in the classroom) and opportunities they have outside the classroom.

I have seen incredible teachers teach in schools without the resources of other schools. Their students don’t score as high on standardized tests, but to deny them pay raises based on their students test scores seems unfair to me. The teachers in the affluent schools aren’t any better than the teachers in the title 1 schools, but their students come away with better test results. I can’t honestly say that their higher test scores are a direct result of the teacher in the classroom, sometimes you must also take into consideration the other variables associated with learning. Many educators will tell you that sometimes you can’t control the “other” variables, you just do the best you can with what you have and try to give every student a quality education. To based ones salary on variables which we don’t always control is unfair.

All of that said, if merit was given based on observations (teacher portfolios), continuing education and professional growth, I think it would be a better solution.

I agree that higher education status in the form of a Masters is nice to see and impressive on a resume, but I don’t think it’s necessary or the only component to being a good teacher. It takes a certain kind of person to be a good teacher, and good people/communication skills to be a great teacher. I do agree with Ambrose that teachers can become stale after awhile and can lapse into the same track, but that is the same with anyone in a job that requires knowledge application and expertise. However, I also believe solid interactive workshops, continuing education opportunities, and teacher spiffs (other than educational background status) can be a huge motivator to dust off the innovation cape and try new things. Custom and off-the-shelf Learning companies teach industry organizations and workforce employees to think differently and change behaviors for success, and teachers should be no different.

Being the mother of an AD/HD special needs child, I would rather have a teacher for my son with a B Ed. or Special Ed and lots of personality and attitude that can spark enthusiasm and creativity in his learning than someone with one or more higher degrees that may or may not have those abilities.

Whether they hold a Bachelor’s or Master’s, I hold all teachers in high regard.

I am a high school teacher who has a master’s degree and has worked in both the St. Louis City Public Schools as well as two St. Louis County Districts. While I do think that a master’s degree does expand, further, the knowledge and philosophies of teaching, I am not so sure it makes for a better teacher. There are many who have “it” when it comes to teaching. In addition, I do find it very unfair that teachers’ raises are based on the scores of state testing. Especially when you have students who are irresponsible and decide to mark any circle on those tests. In addition, I am not sure how any district can force teachers to go back to school, in a certain timeframe. Is Ladue School District going to pay the $1500.00 per graduate class for those teachers who must return to school in order to keep their job. Also, there was no mention of those older teachers’ outlook. If all teachers are required to receive master’s degrees… many, including myself, are planning to seek employement as an adjunct instructor at the local colleges. In closing, the sad thing is… most of the teachers, in Missouri, are still underpaid. Would requiring a master’s degree really up the payscale, or does act as a barrier to those new graduates hoping to find employment upon receiving their B.A.
RS

You are right. There is no study done by any independent agency that shows a Master’s degree make a teacher better than one with a bachelors. The most comprehensive study ever done was the one by the University of Arizona, some 5 years back dispels the myth that one with a masters is better, plus LOTS of other myths about teaching. It was on line for years. If it is still on, it would be a good idea for you th have someone to print it out so your editors can read it.

Now I will answer your question: The best way is for a teacher to have a lesson plan for what is to be taught in any given day. They must stick with it. A comparison can made to the lesson plan and student achievement.

After two or three years we can see who deserves a raise, and who deserves to be fired.

We all operate with lesson plans, we just call them by other names. You prevent us with your editorial daily. That is your plan. It is good. I read every one. Some, I don’t agree with. But, you do an excellent job.

I’m sorry to say but whoever is responsible for the electronics in your electronic edition NEEDS A ‘LESSON PLAN’.

A masters degree is important to getting a first gig if you’re looking to teach on the junior college level. In elementary and secondary schools, those with a masters go to a higher pay scale but there are no other perks. I taught for six years and then went back to school full-time to get a masters, and this year I will finally pay off the student loans I took to allow me to do that. That payoff has taken 11 years. Would I have made less/more if I wasn’t laying out X-number of dollars per month to pay off those loans? I don’t teach math, so I’m not really sure. I know my masters experience made me a more informed, resourceful and successful educator. But I’m not sure I have really realized a monetary windfall. As far as paying on merit, I think that’s a fantasy. Two classrooms are not alike. Two subjects are not alike. Two school years are not alike. You can have a great class and a great year and accomplish alot in one year, and have a really tough class and a really tough year and accomplish things the next, but the second year’s accomplishments, when compared to the previous year, may not look as spectacular. For some kids, learning to put together a sentence is as great an accomplishment as another kid writing a Pulitzer-worthy story. Teachers can help kids do great things, but in the end, it is the kids who do it, or don’t.

Having taught between 1964 and 2004, I can tell you how much it meant to continue to take courses in my field. Teachers are in a race to keep up with the students in our technological world. Even in the history field, new knowledge about the past is being constantly uncovered. Subject matter knowledge is so important. I think that I and my students profited from the 74 hours of graduate work that was done after 1964.

TOM

Thank you for your comments so far! One thing I did not have room to mention in the article was that up until 2003, Missouri required that teachers get their master’s degree within a certain time frame — you could get away with not getting one, but your pay would suffer if you didn’t. The state lifted that requirement and instead required teachers without a master’s degree to take a certain amount of professional development hours each year. One teacher’s association lobbyist I spoke to said this made sense because districts could tailor their training to their district needs — a fourth grade teacher could take a class on fourth grade reading skills, etc. He also pointed out requiring a master’s in Missouri was a cash cow for universities.

But, on the flipside, an education professor pointed out that districts doing their own professional development was basically encouraging teachers to sit around and “contemplate their own navels.” That denied them the broader outlook and engagement with the outside community that a master’s degree could offer.

I see both points. But I think it comes down to this: good teachers will find a way to reach students, master’s degree or not. And if good teachers have a master’s degree, they’ll find a way to use that to reach students. AND good teachers should get paid more than they already do.

Bad teachers? That’s probably another article.

I agree that degrees do not make good teachers, but when you are in the business of education, it makes sense to require educated employees. A fair system is yet to be developed for merit pay of teachers. You could place a teacher at a school where the students come from a privileged background and that teacher will look like a genius educator. Then take that same teacher and put her in a classroom where 30% of the children are classified as homeless, the kids miss an average of 27 out of 100 school days, and they haven’t had a good breakfast in years and she will look incredibly ineffective. There is just not a fair merit pay system available for teachers. So, in the meantime, one way that school districts can pay their underpaid profession more is to encourage them to educate themselves at a higher level.
The problem with this article is that is it does not look at the whole picture, taking in all of the challenges that public schools face in educating our kids for a 21st century global economy. To the uninformed reader, it looks like an unbiased article with a solid set of facts about the supposed ineffectiveness of getting a Masters Degree. To someone who is actually in the business of preparing our children from the future, and not in the business of writing news articles, this is an incredibly limited, narrow perspective on acquiring and keeping solid educational talent.

Most teacher’s get a master’s degree to increase their salary. Also, many teachers take the easiest classes available to obtain their masters. Basing pay raises on student achievement isn’t fair to teachers who work in disadvantaged areas or work in the area of Special Education.
A retired teacher.

Donna is right about the types of master’s some teachers pursue. What is a master’s in education? A piece of paper that in most districts will bump you up the pay scale. Teachers have the option of earning their degrees in education or in the field which they teach. If they love their subject, why wouldn’t they choose the latter? It’s usually more time consuming. I earned both of my master’s in my subject field and my students reaped the benefits.

One thing rarely mentioned is that with the structure of Missouri Teaching Certificates, (at least when I graduated with one) you were REQUIRED to earn you master’s within 10 years to get your permanent certificate, along with meeting other state requirements.

As a word of warning for young teachers. Once you earn your Master’s make sure you like where you are. Very few districts are willing to shell out salary for new hires with them. And if you have more than one, look for something outside of public education, no district will give you the time of day. That is experience talking.