Room for Debate has a forum on teacher compensation that features many of the usual suspects, including Diane Ravitch and Agenda favorite Rick Hess. Some of the contributions, e.g., from Richard Kahlenberg, were quite depressing to read. I was particularly impressed by the sanity of Michael Goldstein, founder of the MATCH Charter School in Boston:

If moderates can broker a fiscal deal whereby benefits are shifted more to salary — for example, if a $70,000 teacher salary in Milwaukee that currently comes with $52,000 of benefits could be shifted to $85,000 with $25,000 of benefits (including 401k-type portable benefits that don’t require vesting), the public would enjoy savings and transparency, while younger teachers would find the profession more attractive.

Note the marked difference in total compensation under the two scenarios — $132,000 vs. $110,000. Deferred compensation is politically attractive because it is deferred, i.e., future policymakers are left holding the bag. Something like Goldstein’s approach would yield more sustainable education budgets, and that is all to the good.

To reiterate, however, I think the real goal is to foster more business model innovation in education by giving schools more autonomy in setting compensation and work rules.