미국의 교사봉급 개혁 동향과 시사점

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

A major purpose of this study is to describe and assess state and local efforts at teacher compensation change in America during the 1980s and 1990s that are appropriate for education, that will contribute to the national goal of teaching all students to high standards, that will contribute to improved school performance and student achievement, and that will contribute to higher pay for teachers. In particular, the teacher compensation system must be carefully married to other components of the education system such as organizational goals, structures, and processes.
The difficulties encountered by states and local school districts in U.s. as they tried to implement a good idea-performance pay for teachers-offer some valuable lessons for today's Korean policy makers as they have developed a bonus program to improve teacher quality and restructure the teacher workforce to meet the needs of all students and schools.
Research evidence from the knowledge and skills-based pay and school-based performance awards programs conducted by staff of the Consortium for Policy Research in Education(CPRE) at OW-Madison could suggest a set of principles states and districts could follow if they consider new compensation system to solve the dilemma of how to think about structuring base pay increases based on direct measures of what teachers know and can do. These principals might be used as a guideline to design and implement the new pay system properly in ways that will motivate teachers to engage in the kinds of behaviors that will lead to direct and immediate impacts on student achievement.
A set of principles are as follows:
1) involvement of all key parties, and especially those whose compensation is being affected such as teachers, teacher unions, administrators, school boards and the public in the process of development, design and implementation; 2) broad agreement of all parties on the most valued educational results such as student achievement to align organizational goals and resources appropriately; 3) fair, consistent and equitable methods of measuring individual teacher practice to different levels of performance; 4) balanced linkage of the assessment results to a salary schedule supported with adequate and sustained financial resources; 5) ongoing and systemic assistances focusing on professional development opportunities on improving the identified goals and preparing school staff to plan for and carry out continued improvements toward that goals; 6) management and labor maturity (a high-trust relationship) among administrators, the school board, the teachers and their unions and parent and community support that are teachers are valued and respected; 7) active support and program management from principals; 8) ongoing and significant investment in communication to teachers, principals, administrators, parents, and the public including information about program rules and procedures, program outcomes, appeal procedures, material to be covered on the assessment, procedures for grading the assessment, and program rational over time; 9) persistence needed to continue implementation (Odden & Kellar, 2000; Keller, et. al., 2001; Milannowski, 2001; Odden, 2000; Odden & Kelley, 1997, 2002).

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 서정화, "교원의 전문성 신장을 위한 교원보수체계 개선방안" 한국교원단체총연합회 105 : 2000

2 이주호, "교원보수의 경제분석과 정책개혁" 비봉출판사 2000

3 이정아, "교사 성취급제도 ProComp란?" 73 : 2004

4 National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, "What matters most" 1996

5 Milanowski, A, "The varieties of knowledge and skill-based pay design" Consortium for Policy Research in Education. 2001

6 Singer, "The influences of salaries and opportunity costs on teachers' career choices Evidence from North Carolina" 325-346, 1989

7 A, "The impact of differential expenditures on school performance" 45-62, 1989

8 National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, "The impact of National Board Certification on teachers" 2001

9 A, "The economics of schooling Production and efficiency in public schools Journal of Economic Literature" 1986

10 Sanders, W. L, "The Tennessee value-added accountability system" Corwin. 137-162, 1997

11 Wright, P. S, "Teachers and classroom context effects on student achievement" 11 : 57-67, 1997

12 Wright, P. S, "Teachers and classroom context effects on student achievement" 11 : 57-67, 1997

13 Ballou, D, "Teacher pay and teacher quality, Kalamazoo, Mich" 1997

14 Murane, R. J, "Staffing the nation's schools with skilled teachers" National Academy Press. 1996

15 Schlechty, "Schooling for tomorrow Directing reforms to issues that count" 356-376, 1989

16 Kelley, C, "School-based performance award programs, teacher motivation, adn school performance" Graduate School of Eduation, Consortium for Policy Research in Education. 2000

17 Nelson, H. F, "Salary & analysis of salary trends 1997" 1998

18 Odden, A, "Rewarding Expertise" 1 (1): 16-24, 2001b

19 Guyton, "Relationships among academic performance subject matter knowledge and teaching skills of teacher education graduates Journal of Teacher Education" 37-42, 1987

20 Anderson, K. M, "Program evaluation report for the Charlotte Collaborative Project" 2001

21 Odden, A, "Paying teachers for what they know and do" Corwin. 1997

22 Odden, A, "Paying teachers for what they know and do" Corwin. 2002

23 Ledford, G. E, "Pay for skills, knowledge, and competencies" McGraw-Hill Companies 143-156, 2000

24 Odden,A, "New and better forms of teacher compensation are possible" 81 : 361-366, 2000

25 Washington, "National Commission on Excellence in Education A nation at risk the imperative for education reform" 1983

26 Kelley, C, "Making merit pay work" 2001

27 Hawley, "Making a difference in educational quality through teacher education Jouranl of Teacher Education" 2-12, 1985

28 McDiarmid, "Knowledge base for the beginning teacher American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education" 1989

29 Hawk, "Journal of Teacher Education" 13-15, 1985

30 Greiner, "Issues and case studies in teacher incentive plans" Urban Institute Press 1994

31 Albany, "Incentive pay and career ladders for today's teachers" SUNY press 1990

32 Goldhaber, D. D, "How has teacher compensation changed?" NCES 2001

33 Keller, E, "How Vaughn Next Century Learning Center developed a knowledge- and skills-pay program" Consortium for Policy Research in Education. 2001

34 Odden, A, "How Cincinnati developed a knowledge- and skills-based salary schedule" Consortium for Policy Research in Education. 2000

35 Brophy, "Handbook of research on teaching" Macmillan 328-375, 1986

36 Darling-Hammond, L, "Doing what matters most" National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. 1997

37 U.S. Department of Education, "Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics" 1993

38 Odden,A, "Comprehensive teacher compensation change" Consortium for Policy Research in Education 2001a

39 A nation prepared, "Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy Teachers for the 21st century" 1986

40 Freiberg, "Career ladder programs as incentives for teachers The school as a work environment Implications for reform" 204-235, 1991

41 Hanushek, E. A, "Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance" 19 (19): 1997a

42 Darling-Hammond, L, "A license to teach" Jossey-Base, Inc. 1999