The Problem with Merit Pay

I was surprised to hear that Barack Obama was sticking his big toe into the merit pay waters at the NEA convention and again at the most recent Democratic presidential debate. While Obama has not to my knowledge advocated "merit pay" by name or outlined a specific proposal, his apparent openness to the concept has excited advocates of pay for perfomance who are anxious to see a major figure on the left like Obama defy the prevailing Democratic wisdom and counter the NEA's opposition to the concept.

Marc Lampkin of the Strong American Schools campaign, nobly promoting the idea that education should be at the heart of the presidential discussion, took the NEA to task for suggesting that none of the Democratic candidates in Iowa for ABC's debate supported the concept of pay for performance. However, the candidate Lampkin points to -- Obama -- was rather circumspect in his support. In saying that pay shouldn't be tied to "standardized tests that don't take into account whether children are prepared before they get to school or not," Obama is trying to have it both ways, giving the appearance of supporting some vague pay for performance standard, but also insisting it not be tied to test scores. There's the rub: a pay system not tied to test scores isn't really a merit pay system at all.

Other kinds of financial incentives, such as paying teachers extra to work in high poverty districts or scarce fields like math or science, can't really be considered "merit pay" systems in the common parlance. Those are incentives to attract people to certain districts or fields. Pay for performance means an adherence to some type of evaluative standard, whether it be test scores or supervisors' evaluations (which are bound to be tied to test scores). And that's the problem.

The use of test scores for evaluation of teachers is fraught with difficulties that should be obvious to any outside observer. First among them, you can't pick your students upon whom your salary might depend. Those in favor of merit pay often use the private sector as a comparison point, saying essentially that most people are paid by how hard they work or how many cases they win or how much they sell. And all that's true. But a salesman isn't forced to spend his time on customers who clearly don't want to buy his products. Lawyers don't typically take cases they can't win. But the logic of paying teachers based on performance is similar to saying to a car salesman, "here are 30 adults chosen at random. Your salary depends on being able to sell all of them cars -- a standard car, at that -- regardless of their needs, desires, or ability to pay." Or to tell a lawyer, "you must win the next 30 cases that walk through your door, using limited resources, regardless of the merit of their suits, or the expense required to prosecute their cases."

Teachers don't get to choose who walks in their doors, like the hapless lawyer or car salesman in the examples above. It's the luck of the draw. Teachers (good ones) certainly believe all children can learn, and want them to. But success in terms of test scores depends on many factors, mostly too obvious to mention, outside the teachers' control. Not the least among these, and perhaps less obvious to outside observers, is the support of fellow practitioners. In many cases, a child's learning requires the support of others besides just the classroom teacher. It depends on an administrator who can effectively create an climate for learning in the school. It may depend on reading specialists who can help students comprehend their textbooks. It may depend on intervention specialists who help devise strategies for learning disabled students to make more effective gains. It even depends on successful foundations provided by teachers in previous grade levels. How do merit pay advocates propose to disaggregate the work of a classroom teacher from the support staff around her? For that matter, how would art, music, physical education or special education teachers be judged under a pay for performance system? Would we need to implement standardized tests in those areas?

I could go on and on about practical and logistical difficulties associated with merit pay. But the strongest arguments against it are philosophical. At a time when many progressives are questioning the effectiveness of high stakes testing mandated by NCLB, should we really be talking about entrenching that drill and test regime taking over education today by connecting it to teacher compensation? The real debate today should be about whether the schools created under they tyranny of NCLB are the kinds of schools we want to have. Do we really want high stakes tests driving our definition of education? And driving our definition of quality teaching?

I am always suspicious of merit pay arguments because they seem to insinuate that a teacher's effort is dependent upon his or her level of compensation. Instead of rewarding teachers for maximizing student achievement -- as most would insist they are trying to do anyway -- the right approach would be to reward activities that help teachers become better trained and more competent. For example, most local salary structures reward teachers for attaining a higher level of education -- teachers who earn a Master's degree earn more than teachers with similar experience who do not. Likewise many states offer annual stipends to teachers who achieve National Board Certification, a rigorous process which requires teachers to demonstrate and reflect upon their classroom practices. These sorts of rewards make sense to teachers: they understand the connection between professional development and effective instruction.

I find that merit pay advocates also hope that a compensation structure will do that job of evaluating teachers that should properly be done by effective building administrators. We shouldn't simply withhold monetary rewards from teachers who are ineffective: we should help them improve or evaluate them out of the profession. The canard that teachers' unions protect bad teachers from dismissal is not true: bad administrators protect bad teachers from dismissal or non-renewal. But teacher evaluation is more complicated than simply looking at test scores. It requires careful examination of specific teacher behaviors in the classroom, of how a teacher relates to students, and his or her command of the subject matter they are teaching. This cannot be judged simply by looking at test scores, which may be high in some cases in spite of uninspiring instruction: it requires an effective and highly skilled administrator who knows what she is looking for when she observes a teacher interacting with her students, and who is skilled at helping teachers improve. In short, pay for performance provides an easy way out when quality supervision of instruction is what should really be taking place.

Finally, the discussion of merit pay in the context of a presidential campaign continues a disturbing trend of increasing federal involvement in local decision making. Teacher salary structures and evaluation practices are negotiated locally between a board of education and a bargaining unit under the broad general guidelines of state law. If Denver teachers agree to a merit-based system, then good for them. They've decided in agreement with their board on a system that makes sense for them and their community. These kinds of contractual decisions are and should remain local, not the subject of federal intervention. An important reason why the NEA objects to merit pay proposals is precisely this -- that it takes away control from a local bargaining unit to decide their own fate. If Barack Obama truly believes that education proposals need the support of teachers, then those proposals should continue to be locally decided, not a subject of debate in a national election, unless it is clear that the debate is purely philosophical, and not bearing on any public policy he would enact as president. The federal government certainly has in important role in education. It establishes policies and guidelines that protect the education of handicapped children, for example, and provides funding to support that education. The federal government supports research in education and provides grants to support high poverty schools. But dictating the terms of local teaching contracts should not be a function of federal policy.

The debate about merit pay isn't the debate we need to be having right now. With the demands for charters and vouchers from the right, and the ongoing problems facing education in high poverty districts, the very existence of public education is being threatened. We need to be talking about why public education still matters, and what it should look like in the 21st century. Gimmicks like pay for performance are only getting us off track.

Comments

[SteveUFT]

I really enjoyed the post - thanks for putting the time into it.

[willg]

How many private schools use a merit pay system, if it is so popular with the rich and successful? Few, if any---most negotiate with each teacher, most of whom are underpaid and frequently lack health benefits or pensions.
How many private schools in our state administer the MCAS (state test)---None. Why do you think that is? Maybe they don't want to be compared to the better public schools. Maybe they want to have their own curriculum, and not have to follow the state curriculum in order to pass the test. Home schooled students also do not have to take the MCAS. Why?
Any merit pay system based on test scores will not work. Period. People want a "slogan" type solution to the problems in education, partially so they can focus on just one thing, when the actual answers are much more complicated, but still possible.

Every time I wait at home for a repairperson who never shows up, call several times for many minutes to resolve a problem with a product or a billing error, or discover that a product is apparently disposable after a short period of use since no parts are sold and the repair cost is almost as much, if not more than a new one---then I laugh to remember the last time I heard someone say that the schools should be run like a business. Maybe they meant a small business (local) as opposed to any corporation!!!

[cadawa]

Here here!

[dandjus]

It seems a significant problem is the system we have now is unsustainable financially. As teachers incomes go up, you should see an increase in productivity. And the pressure is to have smaller classrooms--decreasing productivity. I live in Massachusetts and teachers in most districts can earn over $70,000 with 15 years experience and the requisite advanced education. With their benefits and 180 day, 6 hour perday work year that seems adequate. And of the 6 hours per day, high school teachers in my district only have 4 fifty minute classes most days. Teachers do important work and they have to do dificult things at times but it i s my experienec that high school teachers don't work that hard. And without finding a way to increase productivity, wage increases are inflationary and unsustainable for many of these towns. They need to take advantage of technology to teach more students, not fewer.

[exflatlander]

And what experience might that be? I'm only a part-time teacher. Yes, I work only 100 minutes a day - officially. But I have to be there a good 20 minutes early to set up and do routine stuff. I end up staying about an additional hour for meetings with kids, administrators, and more routine stuff. Then I spend about 2 more hours a day correcting work and planning. Oh, and add another 5 hours on the weekend. That's quite a lot of "free"labor that the public hasn't paid for. I think that more than makes up for the 9-10 weeks of time off ( unpaid) during the summer.

[noam4prez]

All the discussion of pay is beside the point. Our public education system is fundamentally flawed from it's very origins and structure. The system is designed to turn (non-elite) children into cooperative little workers. The elite educate their children privately to show them how to exploit those workers.

Take your kids out of school. Teach them to think for themselves, and to learn from the vast array of material available in libraries, the Internet, and political organizations. Teach them basic practical skills that can be used profitably, independent of the "global economy".

Refuse to be exploited.

[Wilburrr]

Or get active in your local community, as you should in a functioning democracy, and insist that your public school board adopt those policies and implement them in the classroom (if they haven't already). If you have been around public schools you certainly know that many are involved in exactly this. The entire inquiry movement places these concepts front and center. Private schools, as you so eloquently state, counter Jeffersonian principles, foster elitist stratifications (look at GWB), and often exist in reputation only (look at GWB). Some private schools are excellent, but many only offer the best mediocre education that money can buy.

[barry51]

www.theeasyessay.com is a free site that uses an automated information organization program. It has been taught to 7 year olds, LD students, in hi schools for basic expository writing, as prep for the SAT and the ACT and as well as a college class.It takes 5 min. to learn. It has been used for interoffice communications, speech writing, and business, technical and scientific reports. The program also has applications for rehabilitative education.

It can be taught to a varied group of individuals at the same time and each will learn to his or her own unique capacity.

A noted side effect of the program is that users begin to communicate logically.

THE EASY ESSAY
An Automated Information Organization Program

In most conversations, the majority of time is spent with one person telling the other person why something is true; that is, giving reasons for its validity. This simple concept is the basis for the automated information organization program at the heart of www.theeasyessay.com , except that you do it in writing. That is all that we ask you to do on this site; just give reasons why what you have already stated as a fact is true. We use the essay form because it is the most efficient form of organization available and we automate this organization to limit your supporting statements to proving only the accuracy of your original assertion.

This free website makes essay writing easy enough for a seven year old to learn (but has also been taught at the college level) and has the capability of being used as a template for business (including inter office communications), technical or scientific reports. It has also been taught to learning disabled students and may have applications in educational rehabilitation. Due to the simplicity of the process and the fact that the automated program keeps your focus on your original idea, The Easy Essay is perfect for oral presentations, essay exams or use in the SAT, ACT, etc. as the process can be easily replicated without the use of a computer.

[Raven]

Dave, I'm as opposed as anyone to using one standard across the board as a means to assess any teacher or student's success.

But merit pay in itself is not the problem. In fact, you describe several components of a well-constructed merit pay system yourself as being worthy.

Increased education - through advanced degrees or simply through targeted workshops specific to the needs of the school district - can and should be included within a merit pay system.

Merit pay simply means paying based on merit. It doesn't mean that all are the same or that one test will determine who stays and who leaves. That's just the way the Bushies distort the results. What else would you expect? They're racists whose agenda is small and petty. Of course their system will be likewise.

But merit pay is not a villain. It's just been trashed because it's been such a flawed Bushie slogan.

But every solution you describe could and should be part of a valid merit pay program.

The problem is what's being presented by the Bushies is a failed program from the start. It, like them, is one-dimensional and doomed to failure.

So let's start over with something that will work. And will reward our great teachers - who perform great work no matter who walks in their door.

[yappnmutt]

two anecdotes that address the issues you discussed.
i helped a friend teaching at a brooklynn school in a poor neighborhood almost twenty years ago as her teacher's aide. my friends class was the ONLY class that lined up before school to WALK single file QUIETLY to their classroom. the same behavior was exhibited to and from recess and lunch. there was no screaming discipline or harsh punishment doled out for the kids who stepped out of line. her students also excelled in the classroom academically with the same discipline. the students loved her. their parents loved her. for this accomplishment she not only received threats and ostracizing from her fellow teachers but a warning from the administration that she was creating a disturbance in teacher morale and subjecting her students to bullying. she quit after five years of teaching because of the lack of support.

a friend and i attended a catholic high school. when his children went to a public high school he couldn't understand why they did only average work. it dawned upon him that our high school forced everyone to learn their lessons; that he was actually an average student who was able to excel academically(honor roll, honor society but just above average SAT scores) because the teachers and administration made sure everyone learned and hard work was expected of those who didn't learn as easily. in other words, public school did not exert the same pressure so students only rose to their inherent abilities not beyond and often below. at our high school we were, in effect, taught to the test, the SAT and ACT tests without giving up music, art, sports and community involvement.
merit pay would work if given to an entire school because it would create the necessary pressure on administration and teachers to succeed as a team which in turn would translate into pressure on the students to excel which would translate into successful NCLB testing.

[exflatlander]

Blame the Students with Disabilities act. (Whatever it's formally called). Kids are routinely labeled ( often by pushy parents finding their own testers) so they don't have to work as hard. The law requires that the kids succeed - or it's the teacher's fault. These kids, often having only minor learning problems, know they have it made.

[Wilburrr]

Merit pay is one of many possible answers to a problem that revolves around limited resources. Increasing teacher pay across the board would draw more people into teaching, provide a larger interview pool when hiring (I have often interviewed as few as 2 candidates for science positions) and increase teacher quality. This does not mean that we do not have some very excellent teachers now, it means that the dregs would disappear. How do we then get rid of the bad ones, given the strength of teacher unions? Promote them to assistant principals, where they are unprotected, and fire their butts.

[exflatlander]

Or, you could get a principal who does his/her job and actually evaluates teachers. Follow procedures and you CAN fire a teacher. I don't know of any professional jobs where you are fired summarily without ever having been formally evaluated. It seems that school administrators are notoriously lazy about doing evaluations. Perhaps it's because they know so little about teaching themselves.

[matandch]

The government really prefers to keep the larger population at a certain level of ignorance so as not to disturb the status quo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccYoVnBc_fk

[NYDoc]

There are some troubling premises accepted in this paper. First, that industry uses merit pay. In fact, many executives are rewarded handsomely when their companies fail. Merit evaluation is a myth in private industry. Second, there are the tests themselves. They are poor predictors of anything including other tests. Finally, I wonder how we evolved to a situation in which we so distrust teacher, the people with whom we entrust our children? How did we get here?

[exflatlander]

How did it come about? Two words: Ronald REagan.

[exflatlander]

You've got it, though this teacher would prefer to see "don't know", not "dunno," You do illustrate part of the problem, though. While pop culture and internet-speak drag the English language through the gutter, NCLB tests only two areas: math and English. Cool kids use internet-speak, tack "Nomsayin?" at the end of each sentence. (In English that's "Do you know what I'm saying?") An entire ad campaign aimed at kids focused on "Whassup?" Which the culture reduced to "'Sup?" And even literate adults will mimic this non-English to show people they're cool,too. So, teaching standard English is like trying to teach kids that they should all be using a language fast becoming as archaic as Shakespeare's "Odds' bodkin!".

[ChristianEcon.com]

This author's obviously been around the real world education profession. I'm beginning my tenth year as a classroom teacher, in a red "right-to-work" state which means unions are not allowed. And as would be expected in such a situation, there are more and more requirements, expectations, and accountability placed on teachers every year. We are increasingly micromanaged and expected to spend more and more time on increasing responsibilities, more and more of our own money, and complete more and more trainings and coursework. Not one teacher in this district (a very large and well-financed one by national averages) would tell you otherwise. We are literally being told that if a child misbehaves, it's the teacher's fault, as increasingly administrators are able to shift responsibilities onto teachers. Parents feel the same way of course. All this with teacher payscales behind the inflation rate.

I would love to be able to teach my way and be held accountable for my kids' scores; as bad an idea as that is, it would be a huge improvement over this ridiculous increasingly top-heavy, oppressive micromanagement and ever-increasing requirements. If this trend isn't reversed, there aren't going to be many good teachers around at all, at any pay. The only ones who could survive would be those without families at home.

Teaching is a profession where the person doing the job needs to be allowed to do the job.

[exflatlander]

Bless you!

[swift goat pet for truth]

I dunno about merit pay.
I think raising teacher's pay to a level competative with private industry jobs so more talented people will take teacher's jobs is a better strategy. But, then, we have seen time and again that society is not willing to pay this much money for that number of competent teachers.

[dandjus]

What is wrong with the talent of the teacher's now? Are you insinuating that we need smarter people to teach?

[1will]

Merit pay is a system that is doomed to fail and also demoralize teachers.
The author was correct when he said that teachers have no control over who walks through their door. They are forced to accept kids that have no discipline, apptitude or willingness to learn. A teacher cannot change a child in the one or two hours per day they are in each class. Poor parenting for 16 hours per day 365 days per year trumps anything a teacher can do for 5 class periods per week.
Most of those calling for merit pay are either politicians or poor parents trying to shift the blame for their failing kids.

[zaneblue]

I'm a progressive liberal, but I firmly believe that every child, unless developmentally disabled, can learn to read, write and do basic math, I don't care how bad their home life is. As long as the children are actually attending school, the school has them for eight hours a day and can teach them. I think merit pay is appropriate and I think standardized tests are appropriate.

However, I don't think teachers should be docked for students that simply don't show up. That is outside a teacher's control.

[1will]

It is also outside of a teacher's control whether or not a child does homework or even classwork. Many children, especially in minority schools, just don't care about education. Their parents or more accurately their mother often doesn't care either.
For many parents all the school system is just a babysitter for their kids.
I will agree with you that almost everyone can learn to read, write and do basic math. Unfortunately it takes more than that to graduate. If merely reading, writing and basic math were all that is required then we could let the kids graduate in 5th grade.

[exflatlander]

Uh, hello? High School teachers see their students for an average of 50 minutes a day. When they show up. Would you want your pay based on what you could instill in perpetually bored teens during 50 minutes?