[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 24 (Thursday, February 8, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1772-S1774]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TEACHER INCENTIVE FUND
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I wish to speak about a casualty of the
budget process. It is a very disheartening development, and I hope it
is an oversight, not the first symbol of the new Democratic Congress's
education agenda because I don't think it should be, and I cannot
believe that it would be. I don't believe that the Senator from
Massachusetts, the Senator from Iowa, the Senator from Rhode Island,
and others who care about education would agree that killing the
Teacher Incentive Fund should be held up and said here is the way the
Democrats plan to approach education. But, in fact, that is what came
over from the House of Representatives. What they did was kill a
Federal program, passed in a bipartisan way in No Child Left Behind
called the Teacher Incentive Fund. They reduced the Teacher Incentive
Fund from $100 million a year to $200,000 in this current year. What
does the program do? It helps reward outstanding teachers and
principals of children who attend low-income, poor-performing schools.
That is what it does. This cut threatens a crucial effort to improve
the Memphis schools and also other schools all across our country in 16
major cities and States.
It is a disheartening development and one I hope will change. The
loudest criticism I hear of the No Child Left Behind bill is it is not
properly funded. What kind of response is it to say we are going to
knock $100 million out of the most important program that helps to
train teachers and principals to help low-income children in poor-
performing schools succeed? That doesn't make much sense to me.
So I have submitted an amendment--it is on file--which would increase
the teacher incentive fund from $200,000 this year to $99 million,
which is the level that was approved in the appropriations bill. It is
also the level President Bush requested for the current year. The
funding comes out of funds available under the education title of the
Labor, HHS, Education section of the joint funding resolution. Unlike a
traditional appropriations bill, the resolution doesn't fully allocate
all of the dollars under the education title. So as a result, I have
been advised by the Legislative Counsel's Office that our amendment
doesn't need an offset.
I will add that President Bush, in the budget we received this week,
has asked for $200 million for next year. So this would permit us to do
what was intended to be done by the No Child Left Behind bill.
I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be printed in the Record at
the end of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 1.)
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, let me mention a few of the details of
the Teacher Incentive Fund, so that we can understand what happened in
the House of Representatives. The Democratic majority in the House
reduced the teacher incentive fund from $99 million to $200,000. The
proposed cut jeopardizes 5-year grants that were made to 16 grantees,
largely serving big-city schools and low-income students with low
academic achievement. The cut will take away funds from Chicago,
Denver, Memphis, Houston, Dallas, and Philadelphia. The proposed cut
will take away funds from State programs in New Mexico and South
Carolina. Many of these programs were developed in full consultation
with teachers and principals and with their unions. As an example,
Philadelphia's grant application was written and endorsed by the local
teachers union. So I am trying to figure out who is against this? It
would not be the teachers, principals, or the districts. Neither
Democrats nor Republicans. So how did it get cut from $100 million to
$200,000?
One of the most critical problems we have to solve today is how to
retain outstanding teachers and principals. The more we understand
about low-performing schools, the more we understand that, except for
the parent, the most important people in that child's ability to
succeed are the teacher and the principal. The quality of the teacher
and the quality of the school leaders are the most important factors.
The elimination of funding, as has been done by the joint funding
resolution, could have a significant impact upon the Teacher Incentive
Fund. As a result, for example, of the joint funding resolution, the
Department of Education has already decided that they will have to
delay the national evaluation of the Teacher Incentive Fund until 2008.
So we have delayed, for a year, helping these children be exposed to
teachers and principals who have more capacity, and we won't learn
anything from that evaluation for another extra year.
The proposed cut in funding in the current year will undermine the
current grant competition that is going on. Applications are due on
February 12, 2007. So say you are sitting in Providence, Knoxville or
San Francisco, and you are in the midst of an application to bring in
New Leaders for New Schools or some other group, they say to the school
district: OK, we will train all your teachers, send them to the Wharton
School in the summer and work with them for a year, and on a continuing
basis we will help these principals and teachers; we will help the
principals become better school leaders. But then the New Leaders for
New Schools will say you have to give the principal some autonomy, let
them hire and fire the best teachers, let them make decisions. So there
is this alliance. In many cases, the teachers union is involved, as in
the Philadelphia case. They make concessions. So everybody is working
together to try to say: What can we do to help these low-performing
schools succeed?
Today, in a roundtable we had about No Child Left Behind, I suggested
we are not talking about No Child Left Behind in the correct way. We
are catching people doing things wrong instead of catching people doing
things right. The truth of the matter is that across our country we
have about 100,000 schools, more or less, and in about 75 percent of
those schools, they are succeeding in what we call adequate yearly
progress. Those schools are succeeding in adequate yearly progress.
Now, those schools, I would say, are high-achieving schools. What we
find is most of the schools I would call achieving schools. Any school
that has succeeded in No Child Left Behind for a couple of years I
would call a highest achieving school. One which has succeeded for 1
year would be a high-achieving school. One with only one subgroup of
children who don't quite make the standards, I would call that an
achieving school. So we have mainly 15, 20 percent of our schools where
we need to go to work and do things differently.
These children can succeed. Memphis has a large number of low-
performing schools, as we call them, but it is not because the children
cannot learn. I was there during spring break last year at one of the
new public charter schools in Memphis. They go to school early in the
morning and leave at 5 in the afternoon. They were in AP biology
courses in the 10th grade. They can all learn. They needed extra help
in a different way, and the difference it has made there starts with a
good school leader and an excellent teacher. Memphis plans to take this
money from the Teacher Incentive Fund and take every single one of its
principals through this year-long training, the summer programs, the
continuing education, and then Memphis decided to give those teachers
autonomy.
So that is what we are killing when we kill this program, not just in
Memphis, but in many other school districts. The northern New Mexico
network, the DC public schools, the Chicago public schools, Denver,
Mare Island Technology Academy in California, Houston, Guilford County,
NC, Alaska, the whole State of South Carolina, a couple of districts in
Texas--they are all in the middle of this. They are making applications
for more. They expect these to be 5-year grants. They are doing what we
asked them to do, and then we come along and kill the program right in
the middle of the year.
[[Page S1773]]
I ask unanimous consent to print after my remarks a list of the
current grantees and programs.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 1.)
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, following that, I ask unanimous consent
to print in the Record a letter from Secretary Margaret Spellings of
the Department of Education pointing out what difficulty this decision
by the House of Representatives will cause to the teacher incentive
fund.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 2.)
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, finally, let me make this observation.
I was visited today by representatives of the Tennessee Education
Association. I have not always gotten along well with the Tennessee
Education Association because of the subject we are discussing today.
In 1983, I proposed the first master teacher program in the country,
the first attempt by a State to pay teachers more for teaching well and
to reward principals in the same way. The National Education
Association went apoplectic for over a year. We had a brawl for a year
and a half. We finally passed a program and our Career Ladder Program
lasted for several years, until I got out of office is really what
happened, and then it gradually went away. Mr. President, 10,000
teachers were rewarded, paid more, their retirement pay was more, and
we talked about that today. I appreciated very much their visit because
this includes some teachers who were part of that Career Ladder
Program. They are the leadership of the teachers' union, the teachers'
association in Tennessee. They came to see me about it, and they were
very honest.
They said any program that picks one teacher out and rewards
outstanding teaching or rewards an outstanding principal is difficult
to do because it is hard to make it fair. But we must do it. Almost
everyone agrees that if we make any progress in education, especially
with low-income children in poor performing schools, we have to find a
way to pay good teachers more and good principals more and keep them in
those schools. We have to do it.
So this teacher incentive fund is a real casualty here, and I hope
the majority whip, the assistant Democratic leader--he is here--I know
he cares deeply about education, about the program in Chicago which is
part of this.
Maybe it is an oversight. Maybe it is a casualty that both
Republicans and Democrats have had to deal with over the past 2 months.
What I hope is, if there are any amendments allowed to this joint
funding resolution, this amendment will be one of them. If it is not, I
hope we can work together in the Senate, as well as in the House, and
do what President Bush has asked us to do, not only put $200 million in
for next year, but send a signal to the big city school districts
across America: Don't give up, we want to help you train and hire
outstanding teachers and outstanding principals.
Exhibit 1
(Purpose: To provide additional funds for the Teacher Incentive Fund)
On page 72, line 20, strike ``of which not to exceed
$200,000'' and insert ``of which $99,000,000''.
____
Exhibit 2
Current Grantees
Northern New Mexico Network (New Mexico)
The Northern New Mexico Network for Rural Education, a Non-
Profit Organization, is partnering with four New Mexico
school districts: Espanola Schools, Springer Schools,
Cimarron Schools and Des Moines Schools. They seek funding
for the Teacher Incentive Fund to implement a performance-
based compensation program to serve a region of the state
where high levels of poverty, high concentrations of Native
American and Hispanic students, and extreme rural conditions
pose unique challenges to public education systems. Three of
the school districts--Cimarron, Des Moines and Springer--are
small (less than 500 students), and serve a large
geographical area--all over 1,000 square miles. The fourth
district, Espanola, serves almost 5,000 students
New Leaders, Inc. (D.C. Public Schools)
This project includes a coalition among D.C. Public
Schools, New Leaders for New Schools, Mathematica,
Teachscape, and Standard & Poors to provide direct
compensation to teachers and principals who have demonstrated
their ability to move student achievement. D.C. Public
Schools' currently works with the Center for Performance
Assessment to ``incentivize'' the creation of more standards
and data-driven classrooms and schools. The project plans to
complement this current effort in the District of Columbia
where the achievement gap is particularly troubling due to
the over 90 percent of public school students coming from
poverty stricken families.
Chicago Public Schools (Illinois)
The Chicago Public Schools, in collaboration with the
National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET),
proposes the Recognizing Excellence in Academic Leadership
(REAL) program. At the center of REAL is the NIET Teacher
Advancement Program (TAP). The TAP performance-based
compensation system--including multiple evaluations and
opportunities for new roles and responsibilities--will drive
recruitment, development, and retention of quality staff in
40 high need schools that serve approximately 24,000 students
in the Chicago public school system.
School District No. 1 for the City and County of Denver (Colorado)
The Denver Public Schools proposes a twofold district-wide
expansion of its Professional Compensation System for
Teachers (ProComp). First, Denver PS will develop, implement,
and evaluate a performance-based compensation system for
principals through a national strategic partnership with New
Leaders for New Schools. Second, Denver PS will strengthen
its professional development, information and technology, and
student assessment systems to ensure ProComp is consistently
and rigorously implemented district-wide.
New Leaders, Inc. (Memphis City Schools)
This project includes a coalition among Memphis City
Schools, New Leaders for New Schools, Mathematica,
Teachscape, and Standard & Poors to maximize their prospects
of attracting, developing, supporting, and retaining a
community of high-performing educators to drive academic
achievement in the short and long-term. The project will
likely span 17 schools that directly affect 10,000 students
in Memphis City Schools--the largest school district in the
state of Tennessee and the 21st largest in the nation.
Mare Island Technology Academy (California)
Mare Island Technical Academy, an LEA, proposes to expand a
current project to award incentives to teachers and
principals instrumental in increasing student achievement. It
will also award incentives to those taking the lead in
implementing Strategic Plan and Professional Learning
Communities initiatives in 2 independent middle and high
school charter schools serving a total of 780 students
with 32 teachers and 2.5 principals/administrators, in
Vallejo, CA. Mare Island attracts a percentage of
neighborhood students from 2 elementary schools within a
block of Mare Island: Loma Vista with a 61.4% and
Wiedenmann with a 67.0% free or reducedprice lunch rate.
houston independent school district (texas)
The Houston Independent School District is the largest
public school district in Texas and the seventh largest in
the United States. Houston ISD proposes Project S.M.A.R.T.
(Strategies for Motivating and Rewarding Teachers), an
incentive plan for teachers that focuses on teacher
effectiveness and growth in student learning. The proposed
performance-pay program will provide incentives to 109
teachers and principals at Houston ISD campuses. A total of
27 schools have been targeted for inclusion of the S.M.A.R.T.
program using TIP funds.
guilford county schools (north carolina)
Guilford County Schools has proposed a financial
recruitment/retention project for the 2006-2007 school year
called Mission Possible and plans to expand the program to an
additional seven schools using TIF funds. The seven schools
proposed for expansion include: Bessemer Elementary, Cone
Elementary, Falkener Elementary, Union Hill Elementary, Allen
Middle, Aycock Middle, and Penn Griffin Middle.
new leaders, inc. (charter schools in various states)
This project includes a coalition among New Leaders for New
Schools, Mathematica, and most of the nation's highest-
performing charter schools and charter school networks,
including the national KIPP network, Achievement First,
Uncommon Schools, Aspire Public Schools, YES College Prep
Schools--and others. The project will likely span 47 schools,
47 principals, and 1,186 teachers in charter schools
throughout the nation.
chugach school district (alaska)
Chugach School District serves as the fiscal agent of the
Alaska Teacher and Principal Incentive Project, created in
partnership with Lake and Peninsula School District, Kuspuk
School District and Chugach (the fiscal agent). The Alaska
Department of Education and Early Development and the non-
profit Re-Inventing Schools Coalition are also participating
in this proposed project. This project expands on Alaska's
performance pay initiative funded by the Alaska Legislature.
south carolina department of education (south carolina)
This project, which is a modified version of an existing
Teacher Advancement Program (TAP), aims to implement a
performance-based compensation system to address problems
with recruitment and retention in 23
[[Page S1774]]
high-need schools in six districts. By the fifth year of the
project, SC TIF has the potential to affect more than 60,000
children and 5,000 teachers and principals. These
modifications include higher and varied teacher bonuses, the
introduction of principal and assistant principal bonuses,
more competitive Master and Mentor Teacher addendums, a new
focus on marketing and recruiting, raising the value-added
percentage in the performance pay from 50% to 60%, using MAP
tests to give K-3 teachers an individual value-added score,
and inclusion of related arts in the individual value-added
gains calculations.
dallas independent school district (texas)
For the past decade, the Dallas ISD has provided incentives
to teachers, principals, and other campus staff based on the
value-added performance of their students under the
Outstanding School Performance Award program. This project
builds on this history and existing apparatus to identify and
reward effective principals based on a combination of direct
and value-added measures of student achievement and reward
effective teachers based on value-added measures of their
students' achievement. In addition, the project includes
refinement of the Dallas database for tracking student-
teacher assignments; incentives for principals and
teachers to participate in substantive, high-standards
professional development; incentives for highly effective
teachers to move to and stay in high needs campuses; and
procedures for insuring the integrity of test results.
school district of philadelphia (pennsylvania)
The overall purpose of Philadelphia's initiative is to
pilot a performance-based staff development and compensation
system that provides teachers and principals with clear
incentives that are directly tied to student achievement
growth and classroom observations conducted according to an
objective, standards-based rubric at multiple points during
each school year. Twenty high-need urban elementary schools
(grades 3-8) that have demonstrated high degrees of faculty
buy-in will participate in the pilot. Leaders from the School
District of Philadelphia's administration and from the two
unions representing all Philadelphia teachers and principals
have designed the pilot and will oversee its implementation.
ohio department of education (ohio)
Key strategies of the Ohio Teacher Incentive Fund (OTIF)
include implementing the Teacher Advancement Program (TAP) in
the Cincinnati and Columbus City Schools, expanding the
Toledo Review and Alternative Compensation System (TRACS) in
the Toledo City Schools, and developing and implementing the
Cleveland Teacher Incentive System, a program modeled on
TRACS, in the Cleveland City Schools. OTIP is a cooperative
venture of the Ohio Department of Education; Columbus,
Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Toledo City Schools; and the
National Institute for Excellence in Teaching.
eagle county school district (colorado)
In the past five years, Eagle County School District has
invested over $4.5 million (not including performance awards)
to implement a performance-based compensation system for
teachers and principals based on the Teacher Advancement
Program (TAP). This project is an expansion of the program
and will utilize TIP grant funding to improve the quality of
Master and Mentor teachers through increased salary
augmentations and increased training. It will cover 13 high-
need schools.
weld county school district (colorado)
This project will be implemented in the 4 high-need schools
in the Weld County School District. The district currently
ranks last in teacher compensation compared to neighboring
districts. The project objectives state that by year 2, a
comprehensive principal and teacher differentiated
compensation system based on student achievement gains and
classroom evaluations will be fully operational. The
Superintendent of Student Achievement of this district will
manage the project.
____
Exhibit 3
The Secretary of Education,
Washington, DC, February 8, 2007.
Hon. Lamar Alexander,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Alexander: Thank you for your efforts to amend
the Joint Funding Resolution, H.R. 20, to provide level
funding ($99 million) for the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF).
As you may know, the lack of a fiscal year 2007
appropriation for TIF would have a significant impact on the
program. The Department (ED) remains concerned that a lack of
funding for TIF in fiscal year 2007 would jeopardize our
ability to make timely continuation funding available for
current grant recipients. While ED has reserved $8.8 million
from fiscal year 2006 funds to cover the increased costs
proposed for the second year of operation for the 16 current
TIF grantees, this amount will not cover all continuation
costs for grantees.
A lack of fiscal year 2007 funding for TIF would also
significantly limit our ability to support technical
assistance to TIF grantees and ensure that information on
teacher and principal compensation reform is available not
only to TIF grantees, but also to the general public.
Finally, a lack of fiscal year 2007 funding would impact
our ability to begin a national evaluation of the TIF
program, which Congress called for when appropriating funds
for this program. Our planned evaluation will be delayed
until fiscal year 2008 unless funds are appropriated.
It should also be noted that a lack of funding in fiscal
year 2007 may undermine the current TIF grant competition
that is underway (with applications due on February 12,
2007). Potential grantees may be dissuaded from applying for
TIF grants or spending time and resources developing high-
quality applications if they believe the program's funding is
in jeopardy.
Again, I thank you for your leadership on this important
issue. Please do not hesitate to call if I can answer any
additional questions.
Sincerely,
Margaret Spellings.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in
morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate is in morning business. The Senator
from Illinois may speak for 10 minutes.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I say to my colleague from Tennessee,
whose interest in education is well recognized, I couldn't agree with
him more. Not only is this program important, it is important to me.
When the superintendent of the Chicago Public School System, Arnie
Duncan, called me yesterday and said we need this money, I said to him:
I know you do. It breaks my heart that we cannot give it to you at this
moment.
I can go through the sordid history that brought us to this
continuing resolution--our failure to pass the appropriations bills in
the normal fashion last year, extending the Government on a piecemeal
basis with a CR, as we call them, for a few months, and now facing the
awesome task of funding the rest of the year with certainly limitations
in funding that have caused a great deal of deprivation. This is a
clear illustration and example of a program that is worth funding and
that should be funded.
I say to my friend from Tennessee, if we cannot resolve it in this
particular bill--and I doubt that we can because of the extraordinary
circumstances--please let me join him and let's have others join in
making sure this program is solid and funded for the next fiscal year.
It is a good program, an excellent program. I want to see it move
forward.
The quality of teachers may be the single greatest determinant in the
success of education. I certainly want to join the Senator from
Tennessee in making that happen.
____________________