The other day, during one of my many rants, a colleague delicately said to me, “I think I have to disagree with you a little about merit pay. I think it would be nice to be rewarded for doing a good job.” I had to stop for a minute…
… my colleague’s simple, honest statement sounded right. I too wouldn’t mind being rewarded for my hard work.
Then as I thought more about it and about the teachers with whom I have worked over the years, it occurred to me that merit pay is presented as some sort of incentive for teachers to be better at what they do. I asked my colleague (who is among the hardest working and dedicated educators I know), “Do you think that you’d work any harder, or do a better job because of the promise of more money?” She had to admit that she would not.
Neither would I. Although I had to consider how nice it would be to be paid more in acknowledgement of how good a teacher I am, I never questioned whether money is, in fact, an incentive to work harder or better. It makes too much sense to question. It is an idea imbued with truthiness.
Then I came upon this short, provocative video lecture. I immediately sent it to my colleague and am awaiting her response to continue this conversation. I thought it would be a good idea to open the discussion to the broader community and, perhaps, have it right here in this forum. Take a look at the video and feel free to weigh in with your own thoughts and comments.
If you can’t view the embedded video, try clicking here: Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us.
Merit/performance pay always brings to mind (a) the divisiveness among a staff being differentially paid for the same job, (b) the placing of “difficult” or unsuccessful students between a teacher or administrator and her paycheck, (c) the many opportunities for favoritism and corruption among those who make decisions about who does a “good” job and who does a better one, and (d) the myriad logistical issues including how to measure the effectiveness of a resource room teacher, a music teacher, a phys-ed teacher or any teacher of a non-tested subject.
What is presented to the world as a way to reward “good” teachers and incentivize “good” teaching actually would more appropriately be labeled demerit pay. Paying “bad” teachers less. I can imagine merit pay becoming codified as a “good” teacher’s standard salary and “merit” hurdles being placed in the paths of teachers as they try to move up the salary scale, in effect, paying some less than the standard wage rather than rewarding some with more pay. What we really want is to be paid well (or, at least, fairly) for a very difficult and very important job.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 27, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Christy
Um, could you get Mr. Obama to watch this? Could you tie Duncan down and make him watch it over and over again? Could you get our union to use the video in a pro-teacher campaign?
Every artist flourishes under autonomy. So why is the art of teaching never thought to benefit from even the smallest bit of autonomy? C’mon, think of your favorite teacher. That teacher did something “crazy,” something unusual, something that required autonomy.
November 29, 2010 at 11:10 am
Althea
Thanks for that! One key thing he said was to pay people enough to get the issue of money off the table. That’s key. The problem with America is that there is the belief that everyone has a price. That is not so. People need places of work that are comfortable and where they feel like they matter, and that their contributions matter (other key ideas he brought up). Too many times we have bought into the carrot stick approach and it doesn’t work (and if it does it only works for a short time). Pay people what they are worth, invest in their practice, invest in the future of our children, and give people what they need to succeed.
The real problem in education is that all the “talking heads” don’t believe in education of the masses. If America’s ruling class actually believed in education, we would have a much more informed and educated citizenry.
November 29, 2010 at 9:51 pm
Kevin
This reminds me of a Chris Rock skit, where he talks about dads never receiving any credit. No matter how many things a dad does right, he never gets any credit, the only thing he may get is the big piece of chicken at dinner. I think, for me, the big idea behind this is that, you shouldnt have to get anything extra for things that you are supposed to do or want to do. Cheesy as it may sound, our society should intrinsically always want to do better and perform to the best of our capabilities not because we will get rewarded, but simply because we can and are capable of it. Watching that video, says alot about what category people put teachers in. They consider us the rabbit always chasing the carrot on the stick, and not the cognitve thinker or artist. I totally agree with motivation through mastery, autonomy and purpose. What is interesting to me is that 6 years ago in grad school, professors would always give me advice, and some of it included you can be creative with your teaching just as long as you can justify it according to standards (autonomy), to do as much professional development as you can, even if you think its going to be bad (mastery) and to make sure that students always know why you are doing the things you are doing (purpose). Im sure this was said to many people, way before it was said to me, yet today the plans to improve education still come in the form of merit pay, charter schools and “teaching to the test.” You are all right, “talking heads” need to watch that video and listen to what people actually working in schools have to say. I dont think teachers need merit pay, all they may need is simply the big piece of chicken…trust, freedom, resources and maybe a occasional thank you.