Retaining Effective Teachers Policy
Nevada supports differential pay by which a teacher can earn
additional compensation by teaching certain subjects. The state provides that
those teaching mathematics, science, special education, English as a second
language or "other area of need" may be compensated up to
an additional $3,500 annually if the state superintendent has deemed the
subject to be an area of need in the school district.
Nevada also supports differential pay for those teaching at high-need schools.
Teachers in "at-risk" schools, as determined by the department, are
eligible for an additional $3,500 per year.
In addition, teachers who are National Board Certified are eligible to receive
an annual 5 percent salary increase. However, this differential pay is not tied
to teaching at high-need schools.
Consider
tying National Board supplements to teaching in high-need schools.
This differential pay could be an incentive to attract some
of Nevada's most effective teachers to low-performing schools.
States should help
address chronic shortages and needs.
States should ensure that
state-level policies (such as a uniform salary schedule) do not interfere with
districts' flexibility in compensating teachers in ways that best meet their
individual needs and resources. However, when it comes to addressing chronic
shortages, states should do more than simply get out of the way. They should
provide direct support for differential pay for effective teaching in shortage
subject areas and high-need schools. Attracting effective and qualified
teachers to high-need schools or filling vacancies in hard-to-staff subjects
are problems that are frequently beyond a district's ability to solve. States
that provide direct support for differential pay in these areas are taking an
important step in promoting the equitable distribution of quality teachers.
Short of providing direct support, states can also use policy levers to
indicate to districts that differential pay is not only permissible but
necessary.
Differential Pay: Supporting Research
Two
recent studies emphasize the need for differential pay. In "Teacher Quality and Teacher Mobility", L. Feng and T. Sass find that high performing teachers tend
to transfer to schools with a large proportion of other high performing
teachers and students, while low performing teachers cluster in bottom quartile
schools. Calder Institute, Working Paper 57, January 2011.
Another study from T. Sass, et al., found that the least effective teachers
in high-poverty schools were considerably less effective than the least
effective teachers in low-poverty schools http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/1001469-calder-working-paper-52.pdf.
C. Clotfelter, E. Glennie, H. Ladd, and J. Vigdor, "Would Higher Salaries Keep Teachers in High-Poverty Schools? Evidence from a Policy Intervention in North Carolina," NBER Working Paper 12285, June 2006.
J. Kowal, B. Hassel, and E. Hassel, "Financial Incentives for Hard-To-Staff Positions: Cross-Sector Lessons for Public Education,"
Center for American Progress, November 2008.
A
study by researchers at Rand found that higher pay lowered attrition, and the
effect was stronger in high-needs school districts. Every $1,000 increase was
estimated to decrease attrition by more than 6 percent. See S. Kirby, M. Berends, and S. Naftel, "Supply and Demand of Minority Teachers in Texas: Problems and
Prospects," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Volume 21, No. 1, March 20, 1999, pp. 47-66 at: http://epa.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/21/1/47.