Closing the achievement gap
Schools must deploy the best teachers to where they are most needed.
It's sad but true, as pretty much any parent can tell you, that white, middle-class schoolchildren are more likely to be taught by experienced, highly paid teachers. And it's particularly true in ethnically diverse districts such as L.A.'s. This is a predictable convergence, but one with dismaying implications for the "achievement gap" between white and Asian students and their black and Latino counterparts. Indeed, the achievement gap is at least in part the result of an "instruction gap," and closing it will require re-imagining the ways we evaluate, reward and deploy teachers.
In California, more than half of the teachers who are in training are working in the schools with the highest numbers of minority students. Only 3% of these interns teach in schools with a majority of white students. What this means is that the youngest, least-experienced teachers are assigned to the children who, in many cases, are most in need of expertise. Yes, the state continues to define these teachers as "highly qualified" under the requirements of No Child Left Behind. But that's a dodge that serves administrators, not children. We hope a current lawsuit against the practice prevails. Beyond this, providing a better education for black, Latino and, in fact, all students will require bold new thinking.
First, schools must pay teachers for their actual performance -- not merely an ability to endure. Merit pay antagonizes some teachers unions, which see it as outside interference in the classroom, but the rest of the world is judged by performance. Teachers must accept that some version of merit pay is essential in sorting out great teachers from bad ones. Moreover, merit pay -- or some version of it -- can be used to lure good teachers to low-performing schools.
Second, because under union contracts teachers get to choose where they work, education money follows teachers instead of students. A certain amount should be allocated for each student, wherever that student is enrolled. In schools with higher-paid teachers, that might mean fewer extras such as music; in schools with lower-paid teachers, more counselors and classroom aides. And Title I money should never be used to pretend that students are receiving equal amounts from a school district. That's federal money meant to supplement resources at schools with large numbers of poor children.
