What to know about the new DC Teacher Contract � The Quick and the Ed

What to know about the new DC Teacher Contract � The Quick and the Ed

What to know about the new DC Teacher Contract

by Elena Silva

Two years in the making, a new agreement has been reached between DCPS and the Washington Teachers’ Union. It’s not a done deal, as it still needs to be ratified by teachers and then approved by the D.C. Council. There are plenty of details to be worked out but the broad strokes are as follows:
• It’s a five-year contract, retroactive to October 2007, with an overall (over the five years, 3 percent, 3 percent, 5 percent, 4 percent and 5 percent respectively) base salary raise of more than 20 percent. Retroactive pay will go to the 250 plus teachers who were RIF’d last fall, too.
• It includes performance pay, but doesn’t include the “red tier, green tier” plan that generated so much controversy last year. All teachers—new and veteran– still work under the same salary structure. And no due process or tenure protections are lost for those who participate. The performance pay plan is voluntary and based on eligibility–if you want to participate you also have to qualify based on measures, which are tbd but not surprisingly will be “collaboratively developed” and include “multiple measures” of teaching practice.
• Teachers can and will still be “excessed”—losing their jobs to school closures or district-wide RIFs but maintaining employment in the district—but there are changes here. There are more hiring options for excessed teachers– a $25,000 buyout, retirement with full benefits if you have 20+ years of experience, or a full additional year to find a placement with help from DCPS (after that, you’re on your own). But these options are limited to

Markham Middle School Highlights the Need for School Turnaround, and Policies to Support Turnaround Efforts

by Rob Manwaring

We released a report yesterday that highlighted Markham middle school, a low performing Los Angeles school serving low income Hispanic and black students. Markham illustrates both the need for school districts and states to take dramatic action to improve the lowest performing schools in this country, and the need to make sure that any school turnaround effort is also supported by district and state policies, especially its human capital policies.
Lesson 1: Our lowest performing schools need dramatic change–not just marginal and piecemeal reforms.
The report highlights the saga of Markham Middle school, a chronically low performing school in Los Angeles Unified. Markham was first identified as a low performing school under federal law in 1997 and has been so ever since ( it was likely low performing long before that).
Prior to the No Child Left Behind Act, states and districts were charged with determining how to identify the lowest performing schools. Given that flexibility, California changed how it determined which schools were low performing as its testing standards and accountability systems developed. Throughout all of these changes in how low performance was measured, one thing stayed consistent. Markham was in the group of schools that were labeled.
The school was charged with developing numerous improvement plans for both state and federal programs. These programs had impressive titles including School Improvement Grants, Immediate Intervention for Underperforming Schools Program, Comprehensive School Reform Demonstrations, High Priority Schools Program, and the Quality Education Investment Act. All of these programs had accompanying planning,