several cities have recently introduced merit pay salary programs for public school teachers. merit pay bonuses are generally linked to student achievement on stuandardized tests, and proponents believe that increased pay will increase teacher performance. traditional capitalists maintain that free market choice supports competition and market rate compensation promotes achievement. they further explain that individual workers will work harder to achieve company goals if they receive salary bonuses or increased commissions.
merit pay advocates maintain that
"value added assessment" will enhance teacher performance and promote student achievement. in fact, education secretary margaret spelling recently
declared:
"[The Teacher Incentive Fund] will reward teachers and principals who show progress in raising achievement levels and closing the achievement gap . . . It works in every other endeavor. Why not [teaching]?"
chicago recently received a
$27.5 M federal grant to pilot a merit pay program in 10 volunteer public schools. public school districts are increasingly studying merit pay programs nationwide. legislation or grant programs are in process in california, ohio, texas, massachusetts, michigan, new york, and tennessee. progressive school reforms
have dramatically changed our
buildings and our
classrooms. we must continue to redesign and reshape our schools: urban public schools still have serious challenges.
i sincerely believe cities should use pay incentive to promote effective teaching. however, merit pay bonuses are misguided and ineffective. merit pay is largely centered on student achievement on standardized tests, and standardized tests can be effective measures to study larger trends in education. however, current standardized test programs mandated by NCLB privilege select ideas and skills. students and schools increasingly focus curriculum and resources towards boosting aggregate test scores. yet, research consistently shows that well rounded programs best support long term student achievement.
i believe we should provide pay bonuses to attract teachers to understaffed, underperforming schools. there are too many variables in comprehensive student achievement to accurately assess teacher pay and performance. what is family support? who are cohort teachers? what is adequate classroom progress? is principal discretion too arbitrary? what standards are measured in standardized tests?
chicago mayor richard daley declares that he "wants the very best teachers possible to go to into the most underperforming schools." yet, if we really want the very best teachers possible in the very toughest schools, we need to
staff schools with the very best teachers. too often, schools hire from
disadvantage. if we create competition for teaching positions in the toughest schools, school administrations can hire from advantage. fixed salary bonuses of $10,000 - $20,000 can increase teacher applications tenfold. ineffective teachers will certainly apply. however, a larger pool of applicants strengthens the very best applications.
capitalist ideals
can work in our public schools. choice and competition can provide important platforms to scale student achievement. however, capitalist reforms must be regulated to balance and promote the most effective results. teachers deserve competitive wages. we consistently struggle to design the best lessons that best teach students to be committed, engaged, innovative, and thorough. let's assign salary increases for teachers to staff our most deserving students and schools.
