Link to Original Story

Education Department Still Lags in Employee Satisfaction

By Alyson Klein

The U.S. Department of Education still ranks near the bottom of the list of big federal agencies when it comes to employee job satisfaction, at least according to a survey released last week by the non-profit Partnership for Public Service.

But it seems that the department's employees are a tiny bit happier than they were on the same survey last year.

Out of 32 large federal agencies surveyed about issues such as leadership effectiveness, work/life balance, and pay, the Education Department came in 30th. Last year, on the same survey, the department ranked 27th out of 30.

Still, the department's overall score improved a little, going up 1.6 points, for a total score of 57.3 The absolute happiest place in the government, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, had a score of 81.8 on the same survey. And the "most improved agency," the U.S. Department of Transportation, went up a whopping 15.8 points to 60.4.

The rankings relied on a survey administered by the Office of Personnel Management in February and March of this year. The Smithsonian and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation were added this year.

Last year, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, who hadn't been in office for more than a few months when the survey results were released, took the department's poor showing as a challenge to improve working conditions. He sent out a memo saying that he wanted to change the culture of the department.

"Coming in 27th out of 30 federal agencies in this new report is not where I want the department to be," Secretary Duncan wrote in an email to employees in May 2009. "The current findings suggest that people don't feel they are being listened to, and I expect our leadership and our managers to take responsibility for changing that. We need to make sure management understands your concerns and works to address them."

And, later that same week, he told reporters at a Washington Press Club event that he wanted folks to hold him accountable if the department didn't rise in the rankings.

So, what do you think? Is a 1.6 point improvement enough for Adequate Yearly Progress? Or do Duncan & Co. still have more to do?

CAT Tracks Editor's Note:

Although I thoroughly enjoyed the underlying cattiness of the article above, one of the "Reader Comments" sealed the deal...using the Ed Department's own favored "Value Added" approach to rating/firing teachers...

Dick Schutz wrote:

We could run a "value-added analysis" for the 4200 employees and publish the results in the Washington Post to let the public know who is "effective" and who is "ineffective" and we could "turn around" the lowest 5%. But Secretary Duncan and would probably resist that reform, We could also use some of the Departments budget for smaller "Charter Departments." There are many private agencies who have greater capability than ED. The competition and free market would incentivize improvement in the Department. Secretary Duncan would likely resist that reform. And we could base at least part of their pay on the gains in standardized test scores of students in the neighborhood in which the employee lives. I don't see the Secretary endorsing that reform either. How is the US going to be competitive in the 21st Century with a Department like this?