NEA-Alaska opposes alternative compensation for teachers

There will always be good attempts to improve K-12 education.  Alternative compensation is a topic that causes concern with most teachers because there is diverse terminology and definition of what this means.  Scientific research demonstrates that there is little correlation between small amounts of added bonus money and the work teachers and other school personnel perform. In fact, there is little evidence of this model being effective in businesses that these programs are being matched up against.

We believe the road to success is paved by the following in K-12 education:

• A qualified teacher in every classroom supported by qualified administrators and classified personnel. Research tells us this is the #1 factor in student achievement.
• Small class sizes, which provide the opportunity for one-on-one attention.
• Professional development for all staff, which includes teaching strategies to motivate students with varying learning styles.
• Planning time, which allows for collaboration by staff to plan implementation of innovative strategies.
• Early childhood reading readiness programs, which provide the foundation skills for years of student achievement.
• Intervention programs, which provide remediation opportunities that lead to student successes and provide encouragement.
• Mentoring programs for new hires, which provide employees access to a skilled colleague, who can demonstrate effective strategies.

NEA has suggested that increased pay be considered in "hard to staff schools" and when teachers "increase their knowledge and skills."  NEA-Alaska opposes alternative compensation based on test scores and evaluations.

There will always be efforts made by NEA-Alaska to appropriately compensate all of the good work done by our members in the jobs they do in educating Alaska's children.  When the items above are properly funded and researched, the topic of alternative compensation is one to be addressed again.

Image: