Our Observation

Legislation that ends teacher tenure and links pay to performance will likely become law in the next few weeks, and it has the potential to do a lot of good, or a lot of bad, depending on how the state plays its cards.

The merit pay bill, which passed with flying colors in the Legislature last week, is sitting on Gov. Rick Scott’s desk as of this writing.

A similar bill passed through these channels last year before former Gov. Charlie Christ vetoed it. But things are different this year, lawmakers say. The revised bill levels the playing field for all teachers, including those at F-graded schools and those who teach special education. The evaluations, which will decide their fate each year, are based half on FCAT scores and half on principal evaluations.

Teaching is one of the few professions that provide tenure. It’s important, especially for new teachers, to gain experience in classroom management, a skill that’s hard to learn and even harder to teach. But tenure can also be a dangerous thing. Merit pay could certainly help keep bad teachers out of the classroom, but it could also can those with great potential or even encourage good teachers to seek employment in other states that provide more security.

Although merit pay promises to reward those teachers who demonstrate excellence, there is no wiggle room in the state’s budget to provide those merit raises. In fact, teacher benefits and wages are poised to be cut this year as the Legislature remedies the $3.75 billion budget gap over the next six weeks. State Rep. Scott Randolph, D-Orlando, said the bill lacks both merit and pay.

The good news is that the farther the issue of student spending travels through the Legislature, the less it’s chipped away at. Earlier this year, Scott proposed a 10 percent cut to per-pupil spending. The House proposed trimming that to 7 percent and the Senate’s proposal reduced it even further to 2.3 percent per student.

The merit pay bill, if passed, will stop renewing teacher contracts if they perform poorly two out of three years starting in 2014. The state has until then to come up with a new test to gauge the performance of those teachers not participating in the FCAT, such as art or physical education teachers. This will cost millions of dollars. Some lawmakers argue that they will pay for this test creation through $700 million available in state grants while others say that amount won’t be enough to cover the cost.

Not-so-bright futures

Another item that could be on the chopping block this legislative session is the Bright Futures scholarship. Last week, the Senate proposed a 4.5 percent cut to higher education funding in the state.

High-achieving students are eligible for the award, which often pays a large chunk of their college tuition regardless of income level. Now the state is considering cutting each award by $1,000.

While it’s great to send these hard-working students to college, the state should consider implementing an income restriction before taking money away from each scholarship.

Students whose families are well-off are more likely to seek higher learning in the first place, and while college is not cheap for anyone, many of their families can afford tuition, which means they would go to college whether they received Bright Futures or not. Students who come from a lower-income family are not only more likely to need the extra encouragement to perform well in school, but they also would be saddled with hefty debt without the assistance.

Bright Futures should always remain an option for Florida students, but in these trying times, perhaps the award should be limited to those who need it most.