Keeping Costs under Control A criti

Keeping Costs under Control
A critical criterion by which a compensation plan is judged is cost. If the cost is excessive, proposed increases will have little support from either taxpayers or board members. Whether the cost of a proposed pay plan is reasonable or excessive depends on one’s point of view. What is reasonable to the members of a union may be considered excessive by the board. The objective must be to maximize the five criteria described earlier in this chapter while at the same time maintaining acceptable cost limits.
The American Association of School Administrators (1983b) reported that beginning salaries for teachers would have to be increased an average of 35 percent in order to attain the goal of making teachers’ salaries competitive with those paid in other professions with similar educational requirements. The increases required to reach such a goal would have ranged from a low of 14.2 percent to a high of 58 5 percent in the 28 districts surveyed.
The cost of merit pay and other similar programs depends on the size of the awards and the number of teachers who qualife for them. The problem is illustrated by the experience of Fairfax County (Virginia) school officials. During a one- year pilot test of a proposed merit pay program, school officials discovered that the number of teachers who qualified for a 10 percent salary increase on the basis of performance evaluations exceeded the predicted number by 3.4 percent. The additional cost to the district, had the plan been in effect, would have exceeded one-half million dollars (“Fairfax Officials,” 1987).
The Educational Research Service (1983) reported that districts with operational merit pay plans gave awards to teachers ranging from $28 to $6,00. The average of the lowest amount received by a teacher us the surveyed districts was $804, and the average of the highest amounts was $1,738. An average of 26 percent of teachers received awards. The definition of merit pay used in that survey differs from the one presented in this chapter, and the costs would have varied somewhat if the definition used here had been applied.
A rough estimate of the cost of merit pay can be obtained by multiplying the anticipated average award by the number of teachers expected to qualify. Using the midpoint of the high-low award range reported by Educational Research Service as the average award size and 26 percent as the number of recipients a district could anticipate investing about $24,300 per year for each 100 teachers employed ($934 .26 x 100). Giving larger awards or giving awards to more teachers would increase the cost, and smaller or fewer awards would lower it.

Administrators’ Salaries
Salaries for administrators represent about 8.5 percent of the average district budget, according to one study (Chambers, 1978). Table 10.1 shows the minimum (starting) salaries for nine administrative positions in 1993 94 for districts with the largest (25.000+) and smallest (300—2,499) enrollments.
The data in Table 10.1 show that for five of the six district office positions in the table, administrators in large districts earned higher salaries than those who worked in the smallest districts. However, principals and subject-matter supervisors in small school districts had higher starting salaries than their counterparts in

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Menjaga biaya di bawah kontrol Kriteria penting yang rencana kompensasi yang dinilai adalah biaya. Jika biaya berlebihan, peningkatan diusulkan akan memiliki sedikit dukungan dari pembayar pajak atau anggota Dewan. Apakah biaya rencana membayar diusulkan wajar atau berlebihan tergantung pada satu di sudut pandang. Apakah masuk akal untuk anggota Serikat pekerja dapat dianggap berlebihan oleh Dewan. Tujuan harus memaksimalkan kelima kriteria dijelaskan sebelumnya dalam bab ini sementara pada saat yang sama menjaga diterima biaya batas. American Association of administrator sekolah (1983b) melaporkan bahwa awal gaji untuk guru harus meningkat rata-rata 35 persen untuk mencapai tujuan membuat gaji guru bersaing dengan orang-orang yang dibayar dalam profesi lain dengan persyaratan pendidikan yang sama. Peningkatan yang diperlukan untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut akan berkisar dari 14.2 persen sampai 5 58 persen di daerah 28 yang disurvei. The cost of merit pay and other similar programs depends on the size of the awards and the number of teachers who qualife for them. The problem is illustrated by the experience of Fairfax County (Virginia) school officials. During a one- year pilot test of a proposed merit pay program, school officials discovered that the number of teachers who qualified for a 10 percent salary increase on the basis of performance evaluations exceeded the predicted number by 3.4 percent. The additional cost to the district, had the plan been in effect, would have exceeded one-half million dollars (“Fairfax Officials,” 1987). The Educational Research Service (1983) reported that districts with operational merit pay plans gave awards to teachers ranging from $28 to $6,00. The average of the lowest amount received by a teacher us the surveyed districts was $804, and the average of the highest amounts was $1,738. An average of 26 percent of teachers received awards. The definition of merit pay used in that survey differs from the one presented in this chapter, and the costs would have varied somewhat if the definition used here had been applied. A rough estimate of the cost of merit pay can be obtained by multiplying the anticipated average award by the number of teachers expected to qualify. Using the midpoint of the high-low award range reported by Educational Research Service as the average award size and 26 percent as the number of recipients a district could anticipate investing about $24,300 per year for each 100 teachers employed ($934 .26 x 100). Giving larger awards or giving awards to more teachers would increase the cost, and smaller or fewer awards would lower it. Administrators’ Salaries Salaries for administrators represent about 8.5 percent of the average district budget, according to one study (Chambers, 1978). Table 10.1 shows the minimum (starting) salaries for nine administrative positions in 1993 94 for districts with the largest (25.000+) and smallest (300—2,499) enrollments. The data in Table 10.1 show that for five of the six district office positions in the table, administrators in large districts earned higher salaries than those who worked in the smallest districts. However, principals and subject-matter supervisors in small school districts had higher starting salaries than their counterparts in

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:

Biaya tetap di bawah kontrol
Kriteria kritis dimana rencana kompensasi dinilai adalah biaya. Jika biaya yang berlebihan, kenaikan yang diusulkan akan memiliki sedikit dukungan baik dari wajib pajak atau anggota dewan. Apakah biaya dari rencana membayar diusulkan adalah wajar atau berlebihan tergantung pada satu titik pandang. Apa masuk akal untuk para anggota serikat pekerja dapat dianggap berlebihan oleh dewan. Tujuannya harus memaksimalkan lima kriteria yang dijelaskan sebelumnya dalam bab ini sementara pada saat yang sama menjaga batas biaya yang mahal.
The American Association of Administrator Sekolah (1983b) melaporkan bahwa mulai gaji untuk guru harus ditingkatkan rata-rata 35 persen di memesan untuk mencapai tujuan membuat gaji guru kompetitif dengan yang dibayar di profesi lain dengan persyaratan pendidikan yang sama. Peningkatan yang diperlukan untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut akan berkisar dari yang terendah dari 14,2 persen menjadi tinggi dari 58 5 persen di 28 kabupaten yang disurvei.
Biaya jasa gaji dan program-program serupa lainnya tergantung pada ukuran penghargaan dan jumlah guru yang qualife untuk mereka. Masalahnya diilustrasikan oleh pengalaman Fairfax County (Virginia) pejabat sekolah. Selama tes tahun percontohan satu-program jasa pembayaran diusulkan, pejabat sekolah menemukan bahwa jumlah guru yang memenuhi syarat untuk kenaikan gaji 10 persen atas dasar evaluasi kinerja melebihi jumlah yang diperkirakan oleh 3,4 persen. Biaya tambahan untuk kabupaten, telah rencana telah berlaku, akan melebihi satu setengah juta dolar ("Fairfax Pejabat," 1987).
The Educational Research Service (1983) melaporkan bahwa kabupaten dengan rencana membayar jasa operasional memberikan penghargaan kepada guru mulai dari US $ 28 sampai $ 6,00. Rata-rata jumlah terendah yang diterima oleh guru kami distrik yang disurvei adalah $ 804, dan rata-rata jumlah tertinggi adalah $ 1.738. Rata-rata 26 persen guru menerima penghargaan. Definisi membayar jasa yang digunakan dalam survei yang berbeda dari yang disajikan dalam bab ini, dan biaya akan bervariasi agak jika definisi yang digunakan di sini telah diterapkan.
Perkiraan kasar dari biaya jasa pembayaran dapat diperoleh dengan mengalikan diantisipasi rata penghargaan dengan jumlah guru diharapkan untuk memenuhi syarat. Menggunakan titik tengah kisaran penghargaan tinggi-rendah dilansir Pendidikan Layanan Penelitian sebagai ukuran penghargaan rata-rata dan 26 persen sebagai jumlah penerima kabupaten bisa mengantisipasi investasi sekitar $ 24.300 per tahun untuk setiap 100 guru yang dipekerjakan ($ 934 .26 x 100). Memberikan penghargaan yang lebih besar atau memberikan penghargaan kepada lebih banyak guru akan meningkatkan biaya, dan lebih kecil atau lebih sedikit penghargaan akan menurunkannya. Administrator 'Gaji Gaji untuk administrator mewakili sekitar 8,5 persen dari anggaran kabupaten rata-rata, menurut sebuah penelitian (Chambers, 1978). Tabel 10.1 menunjukkan minimum (awal) gaji selama sembilan posisi administrasi pada tahun 1993 94 untuk kabupaten dengan terbesar (25.000+) dan terkecil (300-2,499) pendaftaran. Data pada Tabel 10.1 menunjukkan bahwa untuk lima dari posisi kantor enam kabupaten di meja, administrator di kabupaten besar meraih gaji yang lebih tinggi daripada mereka yang bekerja di kabupaten terkecil. Namun, kepala sekolah dan pengawas subjek-materi di sekolah kabupaten kecil memiliki gaji awal yang lebih tinggi daripada rekan-rekan mereka di