You are on page 1of 26


Personnel Policies and Finance

Issues concerning financial support as it relates to personnel probably have attracted more attention and taken more of the time of local citizens, board members, and school officials during recent years than most other problems relating to the schools. This attention was probably essential under the circumstances, and the issues should not be neglected in the future, primarily because the kind and quality of educational programs provided in any well-organized school system or school are largely determined by the qualifications and contributions of the personnel employed. Even the best personnel policies, however, will not necessarily result in resolving some of the basic problems of education in a school system under modern conditions. An essential, but often neglected, first step is systematic and perceptive planning for the improvement of all aspects of education. Identification and agreement on appropriate goals, determination of needs and priorities, development and implementation of relevant programs and procedures, and other similar steps should provide a sound basis for developing defensible personnel and salary policies Although the best plans and policies that can be developed for improving education are essential, they have little meaning until they are implementedthat is, utilized intelligently as guides for decisions and actions by everyone concerned or involved. All factors and conditions in the external, as well as in the internal, environment for education should be reasonably favorable if significant progress is to be made. These include the attitudes and expectations of the staff, the community, the board and the administration; the policies established by law and the state board of education-; the quality of leadership provided; and many others, including the assurance that sufficient funds will be available to provide adequate and appropriate compensation for all members of the professional, facilitating. and managerial staff, as well as for facilities, equipment and supplies. Expenditures for personnel (certificated and noncertifkated) in school systems constitute from 80 to 85 percent of the funds expended for the current operation of the schools. Policies relating to the provisions for personnel and the expenditure of these funds significantly influence the quality of education in a school system. It is important, therefore, that not only boards of education and school officials but also the citizens in each community make every effort to ensure that all conditions are favorable and conducive to

providing a high-quality program of education. From time to time, various school systems have found themselves confronted with an especially difficult problem. If financial support has been so limited or if personnel policies have been so unsatisfactory that the schools have not been doing a good job, many people become dissatisfied and critical. This tends to make it difficult or impossible to obtain additional local support. When inadequate funds are responsible for the difficulty, only exceptionally competent leadership on the part of the board, the citizens of the community, and the administrative staff, or the provision of additional funds from state sources, can establish a basis for resolving the dilemma. If, however, the difficulty has arisen primarily because of unsatisfactory or inadequate personnel policies, it seems apparent that prompt and effective attention to the improvement of those policies should provide a sound basis for effecting improvements. SOME FACTORS THAT AFFECT PERSONNEL POLICIES AND ADMINISTRATION Personnel policies are developed and administered in a changing socioeconomic context. They are influenced by many factors, including new theories and concepts that are proposed, conclusions based on recent research, new insights and understandings that have been developed, and the attitudes and expectations of members of the society as well as of those who are affected by the policies. Theories Relating to Organization and Management Theories relating to organization and management have been considerably revised during recent decades. Attention that was directed primarily to "scientific management" and "efficiency" some years ago has shifted increasingly during recent years to the consideration of factors involved in human welfare and relationships within the entire social system. Selznick, for example, has been concerned primarily with the functions of organizational goals in assisting the individuals involved to identify their own hopes and aspirations with the goals of the organization. Argyrols has proposed the following seven processes that are considered essential if management is to make progress in resolving the fundamental conflicts that tend to exist between personal hopes and desires and the needs of the organization: 1. Precise assignment of responsibility; 2. Appropriate evaluation and rewards; 3. Authority that is binding on all who are in the organization; 4. Perpetuation of the organization;

5. Effective communication; 6. Identification with the organization; and 7. Pacing the work of the organization. The basic problem seems to be one of reconciling individual hopes and desires with organizational needs. McGregor has emphasized the need for acceptance of the principle of collegial collaboration between "superiors and subordinates"the concept that subordinates is capable of self-discipline and self-improvement and that integration of organizational and personal goals is essential if the major goals of the organization are to be attained. Fawcett has stated: Persistent themes permeating the writings of these three men arc (1) the need to establish clear goals for the organization ... (2) the need to utilize intrinsic motivation for changes in employee behavior; and (3) the need to work together as colleagues to achieve co-operatively the goals of the organization. . . . These ideas seem exceptionally well suited for use by educational governments during the next decade and a half. Some Important Recent Developments The socioeconomic setting in which both professional (and certificated) and classified (non-certificated) personnel in education are operating has changed significantly and probably will continue to change for a number of reasons. These changes mean that the relations of management to employed personnel and of employees to management are viewed from: different perspective, not only by each group but also by the society in which they function. Although some board members and administrator may attempt to continue the traditional stance, they can no longer expect to play the autocratic role of "telling the employees" what they must do a how much they will be paid. Moreover, professional personnel no longer can afford to pretend that they are concerned only with teaching or Will improving instruction and need not be concerned with policies or administrative decisions. The inevitable interrelationships are increasingly brought into sharp focus by the accumulating experience as well as by the empirical evidence. Some of the major related developments are discussed briefly in the following paragraphs. A Collegial Situation. All but a small proportion of teachers and other staff members are college graduates, and many hold a master's of a doctor's degree. Many of them are better prepared in their areas of specialization than are the principals or superintendents in the system in which they work. On the other hand, many know little about problems of management or aspects of education outside their areas of specialization. Thus, the need has

developed for involving personnel who have much to learn from working together as peers, and who (as a result of such collaboration) should be in a position to enhance their contributions to the educational process. Therefore, all should contribute to the development of policies and should benefit from the contributions of others regardless of their official status. Mobility. Under modern conditions, neither teachers nor members of the administrative or professional service staff need to be place-bound. Those who have succeededand sometimes those who have failed can move to another location as readily as students and their parents. Thus, teachers who find a climate unfavorable for service have tended to seek one they consider more favorable. On the other hand, investments in retirement and other benefits may constitute constraining influences. Professional Organizations. The organizations for professional as well as for noncertificated personnel have increased considerably in numbers and in strength. If local conditions become very unsatisfactory, the state or national organization may be requested to assist in bringing about improvements. An employee is no longer an individual who has to wage a lonely battle for what he considers to be his rights. He can join with others in seeking justice, defending vested interests, or attempting to bring about changes. His efforts may be combined with those of others either in waging battles against those involved in other aspects of education or in planning strategies for the improvement of all aspects of education. The latter, of course, is' much more constructive. Bureaucratization. Most school districts in metropolitan areas have been increasing in population and, in many situations, this increase will continue. Many rural districts are becoming larger in size and population through reorganization. Largeness tends to result in bureaucratization involving impersonality and red tape. Policies and regulations developed in an effort to ensure order and promote efficiency sometimes tend to discourage initiative and prevent needed adaptations. Personnel, therefore, may either resign themselves to the routines or struggle to create an organization that will develop policies designed to free them to make their maximum contributions to the educational program. Programs Sponsored by State or Federal Governments. Both the state and federal governments have become increasingly interested in education. Many states are providing leadership in encouraging research, planning improvements in curriculum and instruction, and in other ways. Federal funds arc provided for new programs designed to promote stated or implied national goals. These and other developments arc resulting in many adjustments in local school systems, and some of them have important implications for personnel.

Technological Developments. The introduction and use of technology already has resulted in many changes in business and industry and in some aspects of government. It has already had considerable impact upon education. Many authorities believe that the most significant changes in education are still to come and that these will have many important implications for which there has been comparatively little planning. Some of the implications that are already apparent include: 1. The possibility of more meaningful individualization of certain aspects of learning adapted to the needs of each student; 2. Changes in many aspects of the traditional role of teachers that will enable them to function more nearly on a professional level; 3. The need for more careful planning, utilizing a systems approach to ensure that the technological developments are utilized intelligently and effectively to enhance educational opportunitiesand not merely to increase efficiency of operation: 4. The emergence of many new kinds of roles and types of positions in education and of the apparent need to develop a team approach to deal with many aspects of the program; and 5. The probability that the concept of a single salary schedule will no longer be appropriate. Harris and Boulding, among others, have directed attention to certain pertinent facts and conclusions: 1. The ratio of the amount required for salaries of personnel to the total budget requirement in education has changed very little during recent years. 2. There seems to be increasing resistance to rising costs, even though the need for more adequate education should be apparent to everyone. 3. Unless education can find an effective way to utilize some of the technological developments in an appropriate manner and to adjust personnel assignments realistically, we may be headed for serious difficulties that could handicap the development of the nation. Koerner believes many legislators, board members, and even educators have been asking the wrong questions about the use of technology in classrooms and that the basic questions should be concerned with what we should be doing, but cannot do under present arrangements, and how technology can help. He stated, "I look forward to the time when the quality of American education at all levels can catch up with the quantity" and concluded that technology, when properly developed and utilized, could help to bring that about. Although there are some indications that the wise use of appropriate technologies should help to improve education, there are no definite indications that it would result in decreasing

costs. Laws and Court Decisions. As pointed out in chapter 1, there have been not only some important improvements in legislation relating to education in a number of states during recent years but also some significant state and federal court decisions that have important implications for the rights of students as well as for those of teachers and other personnel involved in the educational process. Every child not only has the right to the benefits that can be provided through access to education "which must be made available to all on equal terms," but also has the right to be treated and respected as an individual who may not be subjected to arbitrary and unreasonable controls or restrictions. Moreover, the rights of teachers and other professional personnel to bargain or negotiate collectively not only for salaries but for other benefits and privileges have been authorized by law and are well established in many states. These and other related developments have many implications not only for personnel policies but also for provisions for the financial support of education. Evaluation and Accountability. The idea of "evaluating" teachers and others involved in the educational process is perhaps as old as the idea of providing schools. Unfortunately, the criteria for evaluation often were not stated and, consequently, at least some of the evaluations were unfair or subject to misinterpretation. Many people currently believe that the focus, the context, and the procedures should be changed in an effort to deal effectively with modern conditions and needs. The concept of accountability in and for education has been generally accepted during the past few years as useful and appropriate, primarily because it: (1) directs attention to the results of the educational process rather than to its components: (2) attempts to fix responsibility for these results; and (3) is concerned with the consequences of the resultsthat is, whether the results represent poor, fair, or satisfactory progress. There are, however, many problems and cautions that should be carefully considered. Lander has listed several including: Every writer or speaker should make clear his definition or point of view regarding accountability; It is impossible to discuss sensibly the problems of accountability without reference to the goals of education; It would appear necessary to relate the new concepts in accountability to existing procedures and practices; and There is a real danger that the aims of education will be increasingly restricted to those which can most easily be measured rather than those which arc most important.

The concept of accountability is not limited to teachers and students, nor to the results shown by scores on standardized tests. Almost everyone (ranging from legislators who may support helpful or handicapping laws through board members who establish policies, administrators, teachers, students, and parents) has an important role to play in facilitating or retarding progress in improving education and, therefore, has some responsibility for the outcomes of the accountability process. POLICIES RELATING TO PERSONNEL AND FINANCE The development of appropriate personnel policies is of crucial importance in every state and local school system. In fact, policy planning is a major aspect of comprehensive long-range planning, which is essential for the continuous improvement of education in any school system. These plans and policies should include careful consideration of: (1) the aims (the establishment and maintenance of instructional and instructional-support programs); (2) the organizational structure (concerned especially with positions generated by the aims structure); and (3) personnel processes (those designed to attract, develop, and retain personnel needed to maintain and improve the system generated by the aims structure). Each of these important personnel processes must, of course, be further subdivided into sequential tasks that are essential to achieve the purposes and goals of the system. All of the major policies established through this process have important implications for the financial support that is essential if the system is to function effectively. Policies relating to personnel may be stated in law, in state and local board regulations, and in administrative directives, or they may be unwritten and consequently somewhat intangible. Both the written and the unwritten policies are important in every community. Written policies serve for guidance and are expected to be observed until they are repealed or revised. The unwritten policies are often the most difficult with which to deal. They are expressed through the attitude of the people of the community, of the board, and of the administrative staff toward teachers and other employees. This attitude determines the climate or conditions under which school personnel have to work. It may indirectly affect, and in some cases determine, what is included and what is not included in written policy. If the attitude is favorable to schools and to school personnel, working conditions are likely to be better and morale much higher than if the attitude is one of distrust, suspicion, and criticism. In fact, the attitude of the people of a state or community may determine whether the funds provided for salaries and the salaries paid are adequate or inadequate and even may have a decided effect on whether these funds are used wisely or unwisely in terms of the personnel services provided.

Almost all policies developed in a state or local school system have some implications for personnel. For example, if a local school board because of inadequate understanding of modern educational needs or a false concept of economyauthorizes the construction of inflexible school buildings or provides inappropriate equipment, it may be unable to attract or hold progressive-minded teachers, even though the personnel policies may be well formulated. Moreover, the scope of polices relating directly to personnel is much broader than many boards and administrators have realized. The failure to develop appropriate policies in any pertinent area eventually may result in difficulties. Some of the areas in which policies in many school systems are likely to be lacking or inadequate are: employment, responsibilities, and relationships of instructional assistants, Para professionals, and interns; the procedures and relationships in grievances and professional negotiations; and the role of teachers and other staff members in the development and revision of policies. In many school systems, the board has given relatively little attention to developing policies for noncertifcated personnel and to the relations between these policies and those for certificated personnel. Yet these relationships are likely to be of vital importance in developing the educational program. Basis for Development of Policies The procedure used in developing policies relating to personnel may be as significant as the policies themselves. If the board and superintendent do not respect the members of the staff enough to seek their cooperation in preparing statements that are vital to morale and to the satisfactory functioning of the program, the staff will become aware of their point of view, and this awareness is almost certain to affect their attitude and their work. The procedures to be used in developing or revising statements of policy relating to personnel need to be carefully thought through in every school system. These procedures should be worked out with the cooperation of the staff, and if that is done, the members of the staff undoubtedly will have an opportunity to participate in developing the policy statements. The citizens of the community also should be vitally interested in these policies. Many boards, therefore, have involved lay citizens, along with staff members, in the process of developing or revising policies to be proposed for adoption. The board must adopt policies before they can become official, but the proposals should originate, or at least be worked through, with the staff members and perhaps with leading citizens and should have their concurrence. This is essential if policies are to be satisfactorily implemented. Characteristics of Satisfactory Policies Policies constitute an expression of the values the people of a state or community, the

members of a board of education, and the superintendent attach to school personnel and their services. They are to some extent an expression of philosophy or point of view and therefore are significant in determining the potential and the limitations. Most authorities agree that good personnel policies should: Make clear that the dignity and worth of individual members of the staff are to be recognized and respected in the operation of the educational program: Provide for and encourage creativeness and originality on the part of all members of the staff; Emphasize the importance of competency and quality in staff selection; Encourage and provide opportunities for continuous improvement on the part of all members of the staff; Assure adequate compensation, insofar as practicable, under a plan that will be recognized as fair and equitable by all concerned; Recognize that the best possible working conditions for all staff members are necessary to facilitate development of a good program of education; Be stated in written form sufficiently definite to be meaningful, but not so detailed, or expressed in such a way, as to restrict desirable initiative, and of course be readily available for the guidance of all staff members; and Be developed with the cooperation and participation of all persons who are concerned with, or will be affected by, their implementation. Factors Affecting Personnel and Finance Policies As a result of recent developments, including those discussed in an earlier section, personnel administration in education has moved from a position of somewhat peripheral, and largely managerial, concern to one of central concern for the human condition as well as for organizational goals. Studies by psychologists, sociologists and economists and the resulting modifications in management theory have contributed significantly to this development, which has had considerable influence in industry as well as in education. Several major publications have helped to direct attention to, and provide a better understanding of, the role of human relations in educational administration.11 Modern concern both for employees and for students, therefore, has been directed increasingly to the maximum development and utilization of the potential of individuals and to efforts to encourage greater self-direction and responsibility Nygaard and Roelfs listed the following factors relating to the concern for, and commitment to, quality in education that have important implications for personnel and

finance: Urbanization and the unique problems of financing education in large cities; The growth of teacher union membership and the absence of a unified school employee organization; The employment of sanctions and collective bargaining procedures by teacher groups; The demands and consequences of automation as it will affect both teaching and nonteaching groups; The public's persistent demand for more and better general, technical education; The increased concern for education of the dropout, the juvenile delinquent the migratory child, minority groups, and the exceptional child; Experimentation with new concepts of staff utilization; National concern for the development in many states of community colleges adult education programs, and reshaped career and vocational education programs; and The gradual move toward a longer school year and employment of teachers and other school employees on a yearly basis. Changing Concepts Concerning Education. It no longer is appropriate for teachers to serve primarily as transmitters of information to students. Instead, they have a much more important role to assumethat is, to serve as facilitators of learningto help students learn how to learn and to guide them in the process. In this role they will need many kinds of assistancehuman, mechanical, and electronicand the understanding support of representatives of a system designed to provide the kind and quality of education that will meet emerging needs. Some speakers and writers apparently have assumed that teachers may tend to become modern Luddites who will organize to resist the introduction and utilization of technology and other recent developments in education. The fact that technology has been used only to a limited extent thus far probably is due primarily to three factors: 1. Many educators have not had an opportunity to learn how to use technology effectively to achieve appropriate educational objectives. 2. Its introduction usually involves extra expense, and funds have been in short supply unless they have been obtainable from foundations or for federally supported projects. 3. Some developments for which glowing claims have been made have not been convincingly field-tested. There is no evidence that technology or other similar developments can, or should, replace and professional

teachers or other instructional personnel. However, these developments will undoubtedly facilitate, or necessitate, changes in roles and will create a demand for new kinds of professional and technical service personnel. This, in turn, will have important implications for programs of preparation, salary policies, and budgets. Although there is no agreement concerning the new kinds of personnel that will be needed, there are some indications as to probabilities. Loughery has proposed that in addition to team-teaching leaders, expert television instructors, and other roles that have already begun to emerge, school systems will need content-research specialists, new kinds of media specialists, systems analysts, and educational engineers to work with or assist instruction teams. Establishing such positions probably will lead to salary differentials and, as Fawcett has suggested, perhaps to "a salary schedule based on an estimate of the value of each position to the accomplishment of the goals of the organization." Collective Negotiation or Bargaining. The demand for negotiations not only on salaries and salary policies but also on many other policies has spread rapidly during the past few years. Several states have passed laws on the subject, and proposals for laws are being considered in others. Not only is there a substantial body of literature on the subject, but also the American Association of School Administrators has considered the matter of sufficient importance to issue a special report including some valuable guides and cautions. The purpose of this brief discussion is to point out some of the implications for the financing of education. The most important seem to be: Budgets in most school systems are being and will continue to be more care-fully studied than ever before, and the pressure on the board to devote a larger proportion to salaries probably will increase in many cases; In districts where additional funds can be provided only by vote of the people, sharp conflicts over proposals to increase taxes for schools will continue, and these will tend to result in antagonisms between some conservative elements and teachers; In communities where salaries traditionally have been low, demands for salary improvements will increase; Educators and lay citizens have begun to realize that only limited improvements can be made in salaries and other provisions for supporting schools from local tax sources without imposing an unreasonable burden on the taxpayers and, in most instances, on property taxes; and More attention is being focused on funds obtained from state sources as offering the bust

possibility for effecting improvements. Increasing attention, therefore, probably will be devoted to state-wide negotiations and pressures. Although most authorities seem to agree that more adequate support for education, including better salaries for personnel, is essential in some school districts, many have expressed some concerns and cautions. These include: If significant improvements are to be made, greater unity in the ranks of educators will be essential. There is danger that progress in improving the support of education will be retarded by a bitter struggle between rival teacher organizations and between these groups and administrators and boards of education. The problem of effecting needed improvements in education will not be solved merely by increasing salaries of teachers. There are many other needs to be met, and educational organizations as well as lay citizens need to keep this in mind. There are limits to increases that may be made in salaries on the basis of employment for nine or ten months. Moreover, this traditional concept is in urgent need of revision if the educational needs of modern society arc to be met. If provision is made for longer terms, year-round operations, or appropriate programs during the summer months, more adequate education can be provided, and higher annual salaries probably will be recognized as essential. STATE PROVISIONS RELATING TO SALARIES As previously pointed out, state laws and regulations may affect rather directly

the salary provisions and other possibilities in the various school districts in the state. If only limited funds for schools are provided from state sources, the salary levels in each school system will be determined chiefly by the willingness and the ability of the citizens in the district to provide funds for schools. In such states, salaries in the leas wealthy districts generally may be expected to be much lower than those in the wealthiest. However, when an adequate and realistic state foundation program has been established, all districts, regardless of their wealth should be in a reasonably satisfactory position (unless restricted by other state laws) to develop reasonably adequate salary schedules. Many states, because of concern about this problem, have taken one step or another relating directly to salaries. Several have established state minimum salary schedules. West Virginia apparently established the first state minimum salary law in 1882. By 1937, twenty states had some kind of minimum salary legislation; by 1951 there were thirty-one (or thirty three including Alaska and Hawaii). Since that time, a few states that previously had minimum salary schedules have taken steps either to discontinue the state schedules or to

modify and simplify the schedule. In 197172, twenty-one states reported that minimum salary or salary allotment schedules were used in apportioning funds for schools. There are three major types of state minimum salary laws relating to teachers: (1) those that provide a state minimum salary schedule recognizing both training and experience (2) those that fix minimum salaries on the basis of two or more flat rates but with no recognition of experience, and (3) those that fix the minimum salary as a single flat amount. The interest of states in minimum salary schedules first developed largely because salaries paid in some districts obviously were totally inadequate. Those who were concerned with the problem apparently assumed that if a state minimum salary schedule could be established by law. the problem would be solved. However, it was soon discovered that many poor districts could not maintain a desirable pupil-teacher ratio or a satisfactory length of term and afford to pay the minimum salaries required for all teachers. Since state laws in many cases require a certain minimum length of term, the only alternatives for these districts were to maintain only the minimum term, increase the number of pupils per teacher, employ only teachers with minimum training, or levy excessive taxes. The tendency in most states during recent years seems to be in the direction of attempting to develop an adequate and realistic plan for financing schools from state and local revenues. Progress in this direction facilitates provisions for reasonably adequate salaries, rather than emphasizing minimum salaries as the basic salary policy. SALARY POLICIES AND SCHEDULES Policies relating to salaries, the salaries teachers should receive, and plans for paying these salaries have involved much discussion in practically every community and state since schools first were established. They still provoke considerable controversy in many areas. Determination of Salary Policy Salary policies constitute one important aspect of general personnel policies. There has been a decided tendency during the past quarter of a century for districts to develop written statements relating to salary policy. These usually are developed with the cooperation of the staff or through the joint efforts of representatives from the staff and citizens of the community. These groups, however, can only recommend salary policy, and the boards may or may not approve the recommendations. However, when committees have done a good job of developing sound policies, the recommendations usually have been approved by the boards without major alteration. The purposes of salary policies are to give assurance to the community that sound procedures will be observed in compensating employees, to give assurance to the staff that

recognized policies rather than haphazard procedures will be followed, and to provide guidance to the administrator and his staff in developing satisfactory procedures for obtaining and retaining the services of competent personnel. Suggestions for salary policies or schedules have been made in a number of studies. The suggestions set forth in the following paragraph, as adapted from those proposed for teachers by the Winnetka Citizens Advisory Committee twenty years ago, are more advanced in some respects than those adopted recently in many other school systems. The salary plan should: 1. Meet reasonable competition for good beginning teachers without attempting to offer the highest starting salary; 2. Assure dignified living standards for maturing personnel; 3. Assure relief from hardship for heads of households; 4. Contribute an uplifting influence to the dignity and prestige of teaching in the United States; 5. Help to attract and hold teachers and principals of the highest quality; 6. Stimulate increased graduate study through the master's degree; 7. Encourage study, research, and travel beyond the master's degree; 8. Provide adequate and dignified maximum salaries for teachers for whom teaching is only a part of their career; 9. Provide markedly distinguished salaries for teachers who, in the tradition of the community, make substantial and measurable contributions to education in the district and in the United States; 10. Provide a relatively long period for salary improvement before reaching maxima, but with safeguards against automatic advancement if a teacher's work is unsatisfactory; 11. Provide annual increments of sufficient amount to be "felt"; 12. Contrary to long-established tradition, provide an opportunity for teachers to achieve professional distinction and corresponding salary recognition without leaving teaching for administrative or supervisory personnel; 13. Recognize any special economic factors in the community; and 14. Serve the long term needs of the district, the board of education, and the faculty, and not be merely a temporizing, stopgap measure. The Winnetka Committee also recommended policies that would provide adequate leave for study, conferences, and travel and generous fringe benefits for all personnel. The importance of adequate provision for in-service education was likewise indicated as

necessary board policy in addition to the salary policies proposed. Salary Levels Education and other governmental services are in a much different position than those in business and industry. If salaries of public employees are increased, the cost must be met through the proceeds of taxes levied on and paid by the citizens. Almost everyone watches taxes carefully. Many assume that the more money they must use to pay taxes, the less they have for private use. However, as pointed out in chapter 4, certain governmental secures, and especially education, may contribute to the productivity and to the tax paying ability of the peoplea fact not commonly recognized. If salaries paid by business and industry are raised, the increases must come either from increased production per man-hour or from profits or be passed on to the consumer in price increases. There is very little the consumer can do directly about price increases for products he wants. Yet from one point of view, these increases may be similar to indirect taxes. The consumer has to pay these costs if he purchases the goods, but he, along with others, may have the means rather directly at hand to keep down or limit tax levies and price increases for public services. For some reason, many citizens fail to realize that in a capitalistic society, the values people hold are reflected in part by the prices they are willing to pay for products and services. Thus, the salaries paid teachers and other educational personnel in the various states and communities are always partly a reflection of economic conditions and partly an indication of the importance attached by the citizens to education and teaching. The question the American people are attempting to resolve in this respect is: How much should teachers and other school employees be paid in order to attract to education sufficient people with adequate competence and qualifications to provide the kind of schools and education needed in this country? It is apparent that this question has not been satisfactorily resolved. Salaries of teachers in particular traditionally have tended to lag behind those of equally well-prepared people in business and industry \s one result, insufficient numbers of highly competent people have been attracted to education, the schools have not accomplished as much as the people seem to expect, and many people have been critical. Criticisms of salary policies and other matters will be beneficial if they result in a re-orientation of the thinking of the people and the development of better perspectives regarding the significance and role of public education but will be harmful if they result in decreased support and lowered morale Salary levels for teachers and other school employees have varied considerably, both among and within states. The average salary of teachers in states such as California and New

York has been considerably higher than the average in states such as Arkansas, South Dakota, and Mississippi. This marked difference has helped to make it possible for many of the states paying among the highest salaries (usually among the most wealthy states) to attract large numbers of teachers from those paving the lowest salaries (usually among the least wealthy states). Similar conditions prevail, of course, within states in which there are wide ranges in average salaries paid teachers in the various districts The widest range in salaries tends to be found in the states with little state support and a large number of small districts. A somewhat smaller range is found in states with properly organized districts and a reasonably adequate state plan for financial support. The arrangements made for salaries also differ considerably among district. For many years, salaries in most districts were negotiated with individual employees. Districts commonly paid men more than women' high school teachers more than elementary teachers, and some individuals in each group more than others. Such hit-and-miss provisions led to dissatisfactions. As districts increased in size, the need for a better plan was recognized by all concerned. Within the last half-century, most school districts have developed teachers' salary plans or schedules based chiefly on training and experience. Many of the larger districts also have developed schedules for compensation of noncertificated employees, but smaller districts have lagged in this respect. Some districts have schedules for all members of the administrative and supervisory staff, but many do not. In many districts the salary of the superintendent is negotiated with the board, except that districts generally try to keep somewhat in line with salaries paid in other districts comparable in size and wealth. Some Trends in Developing Schedules A salary schedule is simply a plan for compensating individual members of any group of employees, such as principals, teachers, secretaries, or custodians. This plan may be good or bad, satisfactory or unsatisfactory, in whole or in part. Givens noted some years ago that: "Salary schedules for teachers are social inventions that have been developed by insight and ingenuity to meet the problems of personnel administration in the schools." As previously indicated, there has been a distinct movement toward the development of salary schedules for all groups of school employees. Some additional trends are discussed briefly below. For some years, there has been a marked trend toward the establishment of

single-salary schedules for teachers. In the single-salary schedule, the plan for paying salaries is based on the training and experience of the persons employed. However, there

now seems to be some tendency for this policy to be modified. For certain types of employees, there recently has been a good deal of consideration of job evaluation as one basis for salary schedules and placement on schedules. This has been particularly evident in the development of schedules for noncertificated employees and to some extent has been considered in connection with schedules for administrative, supervisory, and certain other types of positions. It seems likely to receive much further consideration as new types of positions develop in education. In industry there have been many studies involving job evaluation. According to Davis, Job evaluation is an accepted management practice which sets each job value into proper relation with each other, primarily for wage purposes. It provides what is usually called an internal alignment of jobs. This alignment is established by a scientific procedure which is sometimes considered to be so "objective" that most human relation conflicts over wages are removed. Cost and standard of living factors have been emphasized increasingly during the last couple of decades. It is generally accepted that school employees must be able to maintain an adequate standard of living if they are to work effectively. It is evident, however, that the objective of salaries that will enable all employees to maintain an adequate standard of living has not been attained. For a number of years, minimum salaries provided in schedules were increased more rapidly than maximum salaries. However, there is some indication that maximum salaries are tending to be increased as much as, or at a somewhat higher rate than, minimum salaries, thus tending to restore the balance that was upset by special cost-of-living and other adjustments resulting from postwar and other economic developments. In a number of school systems, an effort has been made to provide maximum salaries, especially in the higher ranks, that are at least twice as high as those established as minimums. Only a few systems have been able to attain this goal. The fact that proper preparation is essential for satisfactory teaching in modern society has come to be recognized increasingly. As a means of encouraging professional personnel to complete their college training before accepting full-time positions and also as a means of providing an incentive for teachers who have not completed their college degrees to do so, the differential in salaries for the two groups has gradually been increased in a number of school systems. Many systems also recognize that there are places and needs for experienced teachers who have completed preparation beyond the master's degree; consequently, there has been a tendency to add another column to the schedule. There has

also been some tendency for the increments based on experience to be increased. Within the past few years, numerous districts have adopted an index salary schedule. Some states that have established salary schedules are also considering this plan. Instead of stating a dollar amount for each rank and step in the schedule, only a base amount is stated in dollarsfor example, eight thousand dollars for a beginning teacher who is a college graduate. An index number (such as 1.1) is then assigned for teachers who hold a master's degree, and the salary can readily be determined in relationship to the basic amount, whatever it may be. Similarly, salary amounts for each step of experience can be determined by applying an appropriate index number. There has been some tendency to consider factors other than training and experience for teachers as well as for other groups of employees. For instance, some systems have adopted, or are experimenting with, a plan for relating salaries, to some extent, to the level of responsibility for certain kinds of positions. Others are attempting to evaluate and recognize merit and to provide special increments for merit. Still others have made some provision for dependency allowances, and so on. The length of service during the year for various school employees has been increased in many systems. Sometimes this has been accomplished by increasing the length of the term and many times by providing for needed educational and other services during the summer. Schedules in many systems thus provide for adjustments for length of service beyond the traditional school year. PROCEDURES IN DEVELOPING SCHEDULES Since the acceptance of any salary policy or plan depends largely upon the satisfaction or agreement of those who are involved and concerned, the procedures used in preparing the proposal are of considerable importance. When any changes are proposed, decisions must be made as to who initiates the process, who carries out the study, and who prepares he report. The initiative in bringing up the issue may rest with the teachers, with the board members, with the superintendent, or even, perhaps, with representative citizens of the community. Three general kinds of patterns are recognized in developing proposals for salary schedule improvement. These are (1) the administration-board-sponsored plan. (2) the teacher-sponsored plan, and (3) the cooperatively sponsored plan. Most plans were administration-sponsored until comparatively recent years. In administration-sponsored plans, several procedures have been followed. In many districts, during earlier years, the board authorized work on the schedule, and the superintendent and perhaps members of his staff did the work and submitted the plan for approval by the board.

In more recent years, many boards of education have appointed a citizens advisory committee or a staff committee to conduct the study and propose changes. Sometimes the board has engaged the services of a consultant or a group of consultants to conduct the study and propose improvements. Teacher participation in initiating improvements and drafting salary schedules has increased greatly during the past few years. In teacher-sponsored plans, the local association or union usually organizes a salary committee, and this committee gathers the data, makes a study, and develops a proposal for revising the schedule. After the proposal has been approved by the teachers' group, it is presented to the board for action. In cooperatively sponsored plans, teachers and representatives from the administration usually meet together to consider the problem and to plan the study. The committee that actually makes the study usually includes representatives from the teachers' groups, the administration, and perhaps the board and, in many cases, includes representative lay citizens. As pointed out by Reller some years ago: The trend of wider participation is . . . supported by the view that in a democratic society the various parties involved in a matter should participate in working out basic policy decisions. This point of view requires that teachers, secretaries, and other personnel groups, as well as administrators and citizens, be represented in the development of schedules. There are many indications that the questions concerning procedures to be used in developing salary schedules and salary provisions for the budget, whether for teachers or for other school groups, are among the most troublesome and controversial being faced in many school districts It is no longer acceptable for the board and the superintendent to make decisions regarding salary policy or salaries without consulting teachers This procedure is no more satisfactory to noncertificated personnel than to those who are certificated. However, it may be equally unsatisfactory, as far as board members and perhaps the administration and citizens of the community are concerned, for teachers or noncertificated employees to develop their own salary proposals and demand that they be approved as submitted. OTHER ECONOMIC BENEFITS Although salaries are important in establishing the basic economic position of each group of employees, other benefits should have as careful consideration as salary policy. A policy that attempts to provide reasonably adequate salaries without considering other economic benefits or working conditions is not as satisfactory as a similar policy that place considerable emphasis on the other benefits.

For this reason, most groups devote considerable attention to this problem. For example the Winnetka Citizens Advisory Committee carefully considered what it called "supplemental employee benefits" and recommended a supplementary retirement plan, provisions for group life insurance, a comprehensive medical expense insurance program, and disability insurance. The report stated: With the establishment of these new employee benefit plans the Winnetka school system will have policies comparable to modern industrial practice and well in advance of current educational practice. They should be of material aid in attracting and holding the quality of personnel we need Although all states now have retirement plans, either for teachers or including teachers and other employees, some of these are not realistic or adequate in the light of recent developments. Some still limit the salaries that may be used in computing retirement benefits, others fail to provide for survivors, and some are not on a sound actuarial basis. Development of adequate retirement provisions, perhaps supplemented by state provisions including or comparable to those for Social Security (see chap. 17), seems to be essential for every state. The provisions of workmen's compensation laws are applicable to teachers and other school employees in most states. Although these seem to have been working out reasonably satisfactorily, improvements are needed in many states, and existing provisions probably should be supplemented by plans for group life, accident, and even liability insurance. Practically all the larger school systems have reasonably adequate provisions for certain kinds of leaves of absence. In some cases, these provisions are state-wide. Usually, sick leave may be taken without loss of compensation, up to a designated number of days per year, cumulative up to several months over a period of years. Many small school systems, however, have no provisions along this line or have inadequate provisions. For example, in some cases, teachers who have to be absent must pay the salaries of substitutes. Provisions for sabbatical leave are found in some of the larger school systems but in practically none of the smaller systems. Perhaps some state-wide leave and sabbatical plan would help to resolve this problem. Assurance of reasonable security in employment has significant economic implications. Some states have gone so far in providing tenure for teachers that discharge of incompetent teachers seems usually difficult and expensive. Others still do not have satisfactory provisions for tenure or continuity of service, especially for smaller districts. Reasonable assurance that employees who are rendering effective service are not subject to

loss of position at the whim of a board or a superintendent should be expected in all states. SOME PROBLEMS AND ISSUES Although researchers have tried to establish objective criteria for salary schedules for more than half a century, it is generally conceded that these standards have not yet been determined. The size of our country and the social and cultural backgrounds represented make these criteria a complex task. As implied by this statement, there are many unresolved problems and issues relating to personnel and finance. A few of the more controversial are discussed in the following pages. What "Collective Bargaining" or "Negotiation" Procedures Are Determining Salaries for Teachers? Some teachers and teacher organizations apparently believe that the only way they can obtain adequate salaries is to establish their own committee, make their own studies, and reach their own conclusions. When the studies have been completed and the teachers have agreed upon what they think would be desirable, they insist on having an opportunity to present their demands at a meeting of the board. If the board approves the proposal, the group is satisfied until the next year, when the same procedure may be followed except the demands may be considerably increased. However, if the board should refuse to accept the proposal, the teachers are likely to call a strike or take their case to the public and try to show that the board is unreasonable. As a result of teacher-board controversies or strikes, many people may get the impression that there is something wrong with the school system. Some may consider the teachers unreasonable; others may blame the board or superintendent. The community thus may tend to become divided. However, some people believe this procedure tends to stimulate the public to become better informed about the schools and thus ultimately may bring about more adequate salaries than would otherwise be obtained. In some cases, this procedure seems to have been carried to an extreme. When the board has indicated that some increases might be made but that the resources will not permit all the increases proposed, the teachers' committee has insisted that there be no compromises. Teachers in some communities have insisted that they do not want common ground with either the superintendent or the board and that the only way they can make progress is to keep the superintendent and board on the defensive. There are other communities in which superintendent, board, and teachers seem to be making a sincere attempt to work together. Teachers recognize that the board has serious Appropriate for Use in

problems in attempting to assure adequate support for the schools without excessive tax levies, and the board grants that teachers' salaries have not been adequate. The board, the teachers, and the superintendent discuss their common problems periodically and attempt to develop procedures that will make it possible to arrive at satisfactory solutions. Under what conditions are teachers justified in taking a "collective bargaining" or "negotiation" attitude with reference to salaries? What about other employees? Should teachers and other employees take the position that there is common ground and that they should seek to discover it, or should they take an "adversary" position? Why? Under what conditions, if any, should teachers call a strike? How Should Salaries of Administrative and Supervisory Staff Members Be Determined?

In some school systems, the position is taken that administrators and supervisors are paid for their administrative competence and leadership qualities and that these have no relationship to the preparation and experience of teachers. However, authorities point out that principals and others are leaders of teachers as well as administrators. Many hold that there should be some defensible relationship between salaries of teachers and those of administrators and supervisors. On the assumption that some relationship should exist, attempts have been made to devise a formula that can be used in developing a schedule for salaries of administrators and supervisors. Should the salaries of administrators and supervisors be based on a ratio to teachers' salaries and automatically increased as teachers' salaries are increased? Could administrators represent the board of education in collective bargaining with teachers if their salaries were tied to the teacher salary schedule? Should school administrators represent the board in the collective bargaining process? In more than two-thirds of the larger school systems, the salary schedules for administrative and supervisory personnel have been related rather directly to the salary schedules for teachers. More than one-half of these were based on an index or ratio adjusted to the schedule for teachers. For some time, many school systems that have provided summer or extended-year programs for some students and teachers have recognized that a time factor should be utilized in determining the additional compensation for teachers who serve beyond the regular school term. Thus, one-ninth would be added to the salary of a teacher who served for a month beyond the regular term of nine months. This factor is also utilized for administrators and supervisors who serve beyond the customary term. The other factor commonly utilized in the index is a responsibility ratio that can be utilized for all professional personnel who have assignments requiring special competencies

and extra responsibilities. For example, if the responsibility ratio for a regular teacher is 1.0, the ratio for the head of a teaching team might be 1.15, that for a principal of a large school might be 1.75 to 2.00. Such ratios need to be developed on the basis of detailed studies and analyses made with the concurrence of the entire professional staff. Should salaries of principals, supervisors, and other professional employees bear some agreed-upon ratio to salaries that would be paid those persons if they were serving as teachers? If so, what formula should be used? What, if Any, Provision Should Be Made for "Merit in Salary Schedules? Many lay citizens insist that salaries of teachers should be related in some way to competency. When salary increases are proposed, these citizens frequently state that they would be willing to sec much higher salaries paid for the most competent teachers but that increasing salaries for all teachers would be equivalent to wasting a lot of money. They insist that industry has had merit pay plans for a number of years and has used them successfully, and that these plans could readily be adapted for use by the schools. Many teachers and administrators' have tended to oppose merit pay. They call attention to the fact that merit-pay plans are used only for certain types of positions in industry and that seniority is the major factor in determining salary for many other types of positions. They point out that most salary schedules in education are based on training and experience and that the training factor supplemented by experience is superior to the seniority factor alone. They call attention; moreover, to the difficulty of establishing any effective plan for determining merit in teaching and point to the danger that subjective factors will enter into a merit rating plan. Davis stated: A merit wage system is primarily a procedure for one person to make subjective judgment about another, which means that it is fraught with human relations problems and is one of the most difficult of all personnel practices to administer. Its human problems cluster around the merit-increase philosophy, the rating process, and the use of rating data for merit increases. A University of California study led to the following conclusions: 1. Industry, business and government do not pay employees on a merit program base to the extent which is sometimes assumed or to the extent claimed by some proponents of merit-pay programs for teachers. 2. The purposes and nature of the work situation in business and teaching have little in common. 3. Large gaps in thinking must be bridged before common ground is found for those who

arc in one way or another interested or involved in the merit-pay question. 4. If the purpose of merit-pay is to raise the level of teaching performance. serious questions can be raised as to whether it alone holds much promise; if the purpose of merit-pay programs is to reward outstanding teachers, then consideration should be given to various possible ways of offering rewards. The report made several suggestions for school districts considering the merit-pay question, including: 1. Establish the purposes of the proposed program and secure the acceptance of these purposes by the parties affected. 2. Establish a committee representative of the various interested parties to study the question and then to develop proposals for the district in question. 3. Provide essential resources for the committee to make the necessary studies. 4. Consider the relationships of any proposal to the basic teacher-salary question in the district. 5. Provide for a widespread review of various aspects of the proposal as they are developed. 6. Regard any program adopted as highly tentative and provide for its review in the light of results. 7. Consider and develop any program as but one element in an expanded program of improving conditions within the school system recognizing that many factors affect teaching performance. In the light of all the discussions and developments connected with merit rating, should school systems attempt to incorporate the concept in their salary schedules? If the attempt is made, what are some of the difficulties? What steps can be taken toward resolving the problem of merit rating? Should Adjustments in Salaries Be Made on the Basis of a Cost of Living Index? A few school systems have related salaries to the Consumer's Price Index. The idea has been proposed in a number of school systems and even has been considered by some states as a basis for determining the amount of the apportionment for salaries or even for the state aid program Some of the arguments in favor of using a cost-of-living index to adjust salary amounts in a schedule are: 1. Many discussions and controversies regarding salary adjustments could be avoided. 2. The use of an index would provide for an automatic plan for adjustments and would eliminate subjective factors.

3. Salaries would automatically increase or decrease as the cost of living increased or decreased. Some of the points brought out in opposition to the use of the Consumer's Price Index and, perhaps by implication, to the use of any index are as follows: 1. The Consumer's Price Index does not necessarily mean that the cost of living is higher in one community than in another but merely shows the extent to which the cost of living has increased in each city for which an index is given. 2. The consumer's Price Index does not reflect adequately the cost of living for a professional person because it is based largely on the need of wage earners and clerical workers. 3. Salaries for teachers and other school employees in many school systems have not caught up with increases in salaries paid many other kinds of workers; and,

consequently, if any cost-of-living index were tied to present salaries, it would merely result in an adjustment upward or downward of salaries that are already inadequate and would not provide for desirable improvements. Many teachers believe that before there is any attempt to use a cost-of-living index to adjust salaries, there should be more realistic and comprehensive studies of standards of living and of budget requirements for various standards of living. Perhaps another step should be to devise a cost-of-living index for professional people and to use this index instead of the Consumer's Price Index for determining adjustments in salaries of teachers. How could a satisfactory cost-of-living index for teachers be determined? Would this be suitable for other school employees? Should corrections be made for increases in productivity? If so, how? What, if any, procedures can be suggested for moving away from the annual or periodic salary negotiations now found in many communities? Are State Negotiations for Salary Schedules for Teachers Desirable? As one result of increased teacher militancy, the traditional decision making power in education may be redistributed in some important respects. In what respects, if any, would this be desirable? Why? Under present conditions, teachers and other educational personnel in each school district in all the states but Hawaii "bargain" or "negotiate" with the local school board for increases in salaries and for other rights and benefits. An increase in one district may contribute to pressures in other districts for similar increases, some of which probably cannot be granted without changes in state laws or funding. Nyquist has concluded that "this new militancy will eventually result in statewide negotiations rather than district-by-district

activity." What would be the advantages and disadvantages of state-wide negotiations for teachers and other employees? Should this procedure be utilized in other states? Why or why not? How Can Adequate Salaries for Noncertificated Personnel Be Assured?

Most of the attention in the laws and in the literature seems to have been given to the problem of assuring adequate salary schedules and salaries for teachers and other members of the instructional staff. In many cases, there is no legal requirement that salary schedules be established for non-certificated personnel. Many believe that the relation between salaries of teachers and those of other school employees should be governed by the laws of supply and demand. Thus, if secretaries are in short supply, a school system should expect to pay as much or more for a competent secretary as for a competent teacher. Others oppose this point of view and insist that the nature of the work and the preparation required by various kinds of employees should be the major factors in determining salary policy. As a practical matter, most school systems will have to pay secretaries, custodians, and other personnel roughly the "going" wage in the community for such personnel. Some are required to do so by civil service provisions. If the salaries authorized are too low, the schools cannot employ or retain competent people. Moreover, some of the employees in many communities belong to unions, and there would be difficulties with the unions if salaries were too low. Since principals, teachers, and noncertificated employees must work in close cooperation in many aspects of the school program, many believe that special steps should be taken in every school system to assure that each group understands the basis for, and supports the general idea behind, the salary schedules for other groups. For that reason, provisions are made in many salary studies for representatives from noncertificated employees to serve on teachers' salary schedule committees and for teachers to serve on committees to study schedules for other groups. What procedures should be used by a school system in developing a satisfactory salary schedule for noncertificated employees? What are some of the factors to be considered? Should the same policies and principles be used in adjusting these schedules as in adjusting schedules for teachers?