James Few

ENGL 101
Prof. McCampbell
12/07/2015
James- Your research skills are terrific, and your writing continues to be clear and wellorganized. The only suggestion I make is more details about the alternative plans in Minnesota
and Colorado.
Paying Teachers What They Deserve 119/130
Teachers possess immense importance in shaping the lives of young people and in turn,
the future of the United States. Even with such great importance, starting teacher salaries have
not kept pace with other fields, and current teacher salaries have been set far too low to attract
and retain top talent (Duncan, par. 4-5). Reform of the current method of teacher pay remains a
leading topic on the agenda of national and state lawmakers, yet very little progress has been
made on this front. As of right now, in order to better provide for teachers while also stimulating
growth in the American educational system, a slowly adopted pay-for performance model stands
as the only viable option.
Insufficient teacher salaries exist as a national problem, but for the sake of implementing
realistic budget reform that accommodates for increased teacher pay, one must focus on the state
and local level. This local focus proves important because 87.7 percent of public school funds
will come from non-Federal sources (U.S. Department of Education, par. 1). Implementation of
a performance-based pay model proves difficult but not impossible. The process would be
gradual, and veteran teachers will have the option to stay under their original salary schedule. If
implemented in a state such as Maryland, the single salary schedule would be modified instead
of replaced, and veteran, or more educated, teachers would continue to receive gradual raises
based on current steps and lanes policies. Implementation will be spread among schools of

varying districts and performance levels, especially targeting districts such as Prince Georges
County with lower average teacher salaries (Maryland State Department of Education 5). With
approval of the teacher unions, teachers will form their own committees to ensure fairly set raise
qualifications. Upon reaching a decision, the committees will have to have to submit their ideas
to either the principal or superintendent. The improvement of each school will be monitored
because this pay-for-performance system seeks not only to improve the payment of teachers but
also to improve student performance. However, the current standardized testing model also needs
reform before one can properly assess student improvement. After a substantial testing period,
the school with the most effective model will be determined, and their model will be
implemented on a multi-school, district or state level.
In order to fund the initiative for increase in teacher pay, money will have to come from
multiple, pre-existing sources. Small amounts will be redistributed in by partially cutting cost in
places such as high superintendent salaries (Maryland State Department of Education 1).
Although partial cuts like these do not account for much, when done across the board they add
up. While minor miscalculations are inevitable, the state of Maryland will have to avoid major
spending mishaps, like the miscalculation in 2007 which cost Maryland $31 million in a dire
budget year (de Vise 1). Common Core, mainly the certain parts regarded as unnecessary, has
been a large topic in the news, and a huge part of funding could come from cutting some, not
necessarily all, of the standards educators say are unnecessary. So far, Common Core
implementation has been estimated to cost $50 million in new textbooks and $100 million in IT
transition costs, but Maryland fell short significantly in its race to implement Common Core
(Kazanjian, par. 6). Every year Maryland and many other states struggle to implement Common
Core curriculum, the cost rises even more, and teachers continue to work harder hours with

insufficient pay. Aside from the cost of paying educators more, this proposal would cause very
little increase in budget.
As said before, this proposed plan does not serve as a permanent fix to the low standards
of the payment of educators, rather as a stepping stone to eventual across-the-board raises in
salary. Determining the criteria that must be met for an increase in pay certainly raises the largest
problem for this plan, but who better to determine these criteria than educators themselves? Plans
similar to this one have proven successful in programs such as Alternative Pay in Minneapolis
and ProComp in Denver. Not only have these plans been successful in fairly paying teachers, but
the system in Denver saw higher student scores on Colorados standard student achievement
test (Koppich 13).
By instituting this pay-for performance model, or at least a similar one, teachers salaries
will keep up with other fields and in turn attract top-tier talent to ensure high standards for the
U.S. educational system. Changing teacher pay structure has been an issue for quite some time,
and the currently broken system needs reform. A large scale plan like this pay-for performance
model certainly presents benefits that far outweigh the challenges, but focusing on the state and
local levels ensures slow, steady implementation. This plan will effectively pay teachers what
they deserve, foster student achievement and stimulate growth in the American educational
system.

Works Cited
de Vise, Daniel. Math Error to Cost Maryland $31 Million. The Washington Post. The
Washington Post Company, 12 Jan. 2009. Web. 3 Dec. 2015.
Duncan, Arne. "Teacher Pay Study Asks the Wrong Question, Ignores Facts, Insults Teachers."
Homeroom. U.S. Department of Education, 10 Nov. 2015. Web. 3 Dec. 2015.
Kazanjian, Glynis. Common Questions on Common Core Part 3: How its working in Md.,
what it costs. Maryland Reporter. MarylandReporter.com, 23 April 2014. Web. 5 Dec.
2015.
Koppich, Julia. Toward a More Comprehensive Model of Teacher Pay. Nashville: National
Center on Performance Incentives, 2008. Vanderbilt.edu. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
Professional Salary Schedules Maryland Public Schools: 2010-2011. Msde.maryland.gov.
Maryland State Department of Education, 10 Sept. 2010. Web. 3 Dec. 2015.
The Federal Role in Education. Ed.gov. U.S. Department of Education, 13 Feb. 2012. Web. 3
Dec. 2015.
ENGL 101
M. McCampbell
Fall 2015

ESSAY 4 - PROPOSAL
SCORING RUBRIC

Topic
Introducti
on
0 15
points
>13

Thesis
0 10
points>7

Analyze
solution
and how
to
implemen
t it
0 15
points>1
3

Does not meet C

0 7 points
States the
problem; vague
reference to
solution.

Meets C standard
8 - 12 points

0 4 points
Identifies the
solution; flat
statement about
the solution.

5 7 points

0 7 points
Flat statement of
how solution will
address problem
Does not include
affected group
Does not describe
the process of
implementation.

8 - 12 points

State the problem,

situation or enterprise;
support your reasoning
with researched
information to show how
there is a problem, a needy
situation or a worth
enterprise.

Identify the solution,

judges it, and shows its
relationship to the
problem, situation or
enterprise .

How it should address the

problem or fix it. At least
one verifiable statistic or
examples or detail and
cite it
Shows how affected group
will benefit(or not)
Describes the process,
costs and materials for
implementation

Evaluate
the
solution
0 15
points>1
2 what
are the

0 7 points
Reports on
outcomes
Not
recommendation
Does not address
the affected
group or the

8 - 12 points
Clearly stated judgment of
solution
Projects effectiveness and
impact on affected group
Comments on the
practicality/feasibility of

Exceeds C paper
13 15 POINTS
States the problem;
clear background;
clearly shows who
/what is affected;
comments about
available initiatives;
Specific appeal to the
audience.

8 10 points
Cites reasons for the
solution.

13 15 POINTS
Provides several
specific
examples/statistics/d
etails how solution
will address the
problem.
Gives specific
examples/evidence of
how the affected
group will benefit(or
not)
Clearly explains
implementation, cost,
materials and other
relevant detail.
13 15 POINTS
Comments on the
quality of the solution
and supports with
specific evidence
Comments on the
level of
feasibility/practicality

other
alternati
ve plans
about?

Conclusio
n
05
points>4

feasibility/practica
lity

the implementation
Support with researched
evidence.

of the solution
Gives specific
details/examples.

0 2 point

3 4 points

5 points

Flatly summary of
problem, solution,
and whether is it
acceptable or not.
Brings up a new
subject.

Restates the final judgment

and connects with the
problem and how well the
solution will work.

Refers to topics
brought up in the
intro; indicates the
degree of challenge
the problem poses
and how the solution
can address it.

In-Text Citations
0 -10 points>10

Work Cited Entries

0 -5 points>5

Quality of sources
0 -5 points>5

Paragraph Structure
0 -10 points>10

0 4 points
Material is not cited
correctly or
appropriately at least
three times; does not
follow MLA format.
0 2 point
MLA format is
haphazardly followed;
entries are not
alphabetized; uses URL
instead of citation.
Sources include
questionable credibility
or are personal sites
0 4 points
One or two topic
sentences missing;
Paragraphs lack unity

Coherence
0 -10 points>10

Paragraph not related to

topic;
Organization does not
follow a clear pattern;
Abrupt changes;

Diction
0 -10 points>10

Wording is vague;
Words are confused
with other meanings
Grammatical
conventions are
infracted;
Uses second pers prn;

Errors (prorated / 500 words) 0=20

5 7 points
Most material is
correctly and
appropriately cited;
MLA format is correct

8 10 points
All material is correctly
and appropriately cited;
follows MLA format
without errors

3 4 points
Three sources are on
Work Cited list; list is
mostly correct; all
entries are
alphabetized
Sources are relevant
and credible; some
sources are not
clarified in the essay.
5 7 points
Clearly stated topic
sentences;
Paragraphs clearly
related to thesis
Paragraphs arranged
in logical order;
Ideas follow logical
development
Employs transitions
when necessary
Uses appropriate
pronouns;
Avoids redundant
wording;
Uses words correctly
Avoids slang and worn
out cliches

5 points
All work cited entries are
correct.

All sources are relevant

and credible and clearly
identified in the essay
8 10 points
Topic sentences are
specifically worded and
link thesis and all
supporting material
Transitions move ideas
clearly throughout essay;
Ideas build on each
other to emphasize
thesis
Writers voice is clear
and authoritative;
Employs specific words;
employs active voice
and specific verbs;
Wording is concise

TOTAL POINTS___>119_________/130