Stephen Hurley has been involved in public education for 28 years, and is passionately committed to the idea of effective, powerful learning experiences for all participants. A musician, technology-watcher, father, husband, Hurley finds life in the world of education, even when the conversations get a little contentious. If Stephen were to be doing anything else right now, it would be hosting his own syndicated radio program on--you guessed it--education. For more of Stephen's of thoughts on schools and education visit him at http://www.teachingoutloud.org or email him at stephen.hurley@sympatico.ca. He can also be found on twitter as @stephen_hurley
Merit Pay for Canadian Teachers
Is it worth a look?
I’m not opposed to merit pay for teachers on the grounds that I am looking to protect the jobs of incompetent colleagues, or my own job, for that matter. I’m not opposed to it because, as a teacher, I’m afraid of being publicly judged. And I’m certainly not opposed to a system of merit pay because I’m resistant to change. No, the reason I’m opposed to concept of merit pay for teachers—at least the models of merit pay as they are generally being debated in the United States and, most recently, here in Canada—is that they are ill-conceived, simplistic and are very unlikely to have any lasting impact on the success of students in our schools.
When B.C. leadership hopeful Kevin Falcon indicated a few weeks ago that he was willing to include merit pay for his province’s teachers as a plank in his political campaign, the reaction was predictable, polarized and protective. I don’t know about you, but I wasn’t too surprised by this. If we’re serious about revamping the model we use to compensate and value teachers, all of the parties involved need to be at the table throughout the entire process. Thoughtful, respectful conversation on this issue will always trump media storms and political manoeuvrings. We have to think more carefully about our motivations for introducing these ideas as well as our long-term goals for our schools and our students. I’m not confident that this is being done to an adequate degree.
We also need to think clearly about the long term costs of implementing a new compensation model. With teacher salaries and benefits taking up the lion’s share of any education budget, it is important to consider what would happen if a teacher merit plan actually worked! Teacher merit pay is often lumped into conversations about teacher accountability. Financial accountability cannot be ignored in the process.
The idea of paying educators based on student performance fails to acknowledge the complexity of the teaching enterprise. The use of some narrowly devised value-added metrics to assign bonuses to teachers represents, not only a misapplication of this type of assessment tool, but it tries to bypass the need to recognize that student performance on the standardized evaluations that would be necessary under such a scheme cannot possibly capture the complexity involved. Basing teacher performance solely on student performance assumes a simplicity about the work of teaching that is simply not there.
Finally, the idea of merit pay for teachers may yield some short-term gains, but both the model and the gains are likely to have a limited shelf life. Again, on the one hand, the cost of ensuring that the scheme is both scalable and sustainable would be, by all accounts, prohibitive. On the other hand, we already know that, while high stakes testing can actually draw attention to areas on which focus is required, they can also sideline other valuable aspects of the school experience. In the end, the implementation of a merit pay scheme based on student performance runs the serious risk of narrowing the scope of classroom practice even more. In effect, a model designed to improve student achievement may, in fact, serve to have the opposite effect.
That said, I’m all for having a discussion about how to restructure the way that we compensate teachers for the work that they do. I don’t know many people who would argue that the current experience-education matrix of determining teacher value represents a type of international gold standard. But let’s be a little more creative, respectful and intelligent about it.
I don’t know about my colleagues, but I feel that I’m pretty well-compensated as a teacher. I recognize the value of my benefits package, the freedom provided by the structure of the school year in terms of vacation time and the fact that I have been paying into a pretty enviable pension plan. While I’m not adverse to higher levels of pay (I do have a family and a mortgage), I don’t think that the prospect of remuneration for student results is going to make me approach my job in a different way. I’m not going to spend additional hours preparing lessons. I’m not necessarily going to teach more effectively. I won’t be more dedicated to the students that I teach. I like to think that, while there is always room for improvement, monetary incentives are not going to bring me to a new plateau of excellence.
Similarly, for teachers who should likely be considering another profession (and there are some), a whole new model of compensation is unlikely to provide the motivation that they need to work harder or perform better.
So, there you have a sense (admittedly brief) of why I can’t take seriously the argument that teacher merit pay is going to improve teacher quality and student achievement in this country.
But, I’m not done. I do have a modest proposal for a performance incentive program of my own, based on what I know motivates me as a teacher and, as Daniel Pink suggests in his book, Drive, motivates most people involved in work that is both complicated and complex.
That will be the topic of my next posting.
Until then, do you believe that a system of merit pay is what is needed to improve teacher quality in this country? Do you think that teachers need incentives to do better work? What would your system look like? Feel free to take issue with anything that I’ve said so far. Feel free to offer your own thoughts and ideas!
So, there is considerable
So, there is considerable doubt about the effectiveness of merit pay or other forms of performance assessments on the work of teachers already committed to the profession, but one issue that is being discussed south of the border has to do with how performance incentives can be used to attract new teachers to the profession.
To be sure, current teacher compensation here in Canada exceeds levels in the United States, but could Miles' comments on "quality of life" for teachers be used to help us talk about making sure that we are still attracting high quality candidates here in Canada. We still have fairly high attrition rates in the first years of teaching. Money might attract, but what is it that will allow us to keep our well-screened and well-trained teacher candidates?
A school system that truly
A school system that truly promotes equality of opportunity would do away with tired forms of free market education. Who says that paying a teacher more money is going to make him or hera better teacher? It may motivate him or her to TRY and elicit higher grades from students, but there is a bigger picture at work here. Grades are measured by standardized tests such as the FSA (Foundational Skills Assessment) that we have here in British Columbia, which evaluates the proficiency of a student's basic reading, writing and arithmetic skills. Schools all over the province achieve a different range of scores on this test. Let's take a look at the current lowest scoring school district, which is #50, Haida Gwaii. The scores for Grade 7 students are shockingly low here. Only 50% of all students meet the standard performance for reading, writing and numeracy. (http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/reporting/district_data_summary.php)
From this information, can we conclude that students in Haida Gwaii are less intelligent? Can we conclude that the schools are poorly organized? Can we conclude that the teachers are inferior? Do you think that throwing more money at teachers in this region will produce any other results? The answer to all of the above is no. Haida Gwaii has a strong aboriginal heritage, permeated with valuable knowledge that is not recognized by a standardized paper pencil test like the FSA. What is considered "foundational" on Haida Gwaii, may include more than what is represented on the test. So paying teachers to elicit higher grades is like asking them to grow oranges on an apple tree. First, there is no shortage of intellect in the students of Haida Gwaii, but if teachers are to be paid according to the very forms of assessment that alienate these students, then what teacher in their right mind would want to work in this district? Ironically, only the most ineffective educators would be attracted here, because it would be the only place they could find a job, and merit pay would actually end up doing the opposite of what it is supposed to do.
I don't think that if you pay a teacher more money, they will implicitly become a better teacher. However, if you want to throw money at education, how about directing it towards achieving significantly smaller class sizes? As a teacher myself, my wage is more than enough, but my workload is crippling. A smaller class size would be a start.
Hi Miles, I appreciate your
Hi Miles,
I appreciate your very passionate response to this issue. Being from British Columbia, you have the added advantage of being closer to the most recent debate about this.
I think the point that intrigues me the most about your comments has to do with the knowledge, learning and attitudes that are sidelined when you start establishing a set of criteria to determine success and progress. The rich and valuable knowledge possess by the Haida Gwaii community would not be captured by proposed systems of teacher merit pay, and this would be unfortunate (and unacceptable) on several levels.
But I do have a question for you. As a teacher, are you satisfied with the current model of teacher compensation? Can you imagine a way to change it so that high quality teaching is both recognized and encouraged? (I know that the mere asking of the question may be contentious, but I'll ask it anyway.)
I'm quite satisfied with the
I'm quite satisfied with the pay scales. However, most teachers I know feel overworked. More money doesn't necessarily make a happier person. More time and meaningful connections with people can definately improve quality of life. For example, a greater emphasis on Socio Emotional learning is a good idea not only for students but for teachers too.
-miles
Hi Miles, I totally agree
Hi Miles,
I totally agree that more money is not the key here. Daniel Pink in his book, Drive, suggests that, once people are paid fairly, then other aspects of working conditions become much more important.
So, I guess what I'm trying to get a handle on in this discussion is what, specifically, they would be for teachers.
You mention SEL. I understand the benefit for students; could you say more about how this would benefit teachers?
Thanks for your participation here!
stephen
The American school system is
The American school system is not in shambles because of the teachers. It is failing because of a gap between the rich and the poor, which grows wider every day. Blaming teachers is the last thing American society should do. Systemic problems in socio economically disadvantaged neighbourhoods are much more likely to blame for low literacy levels. Second of all, what do we repeatedly tell students? Sure, we tell them that they are the ones responsible for their grades. We encourage them to be active participants and to take responsibility for their learning. But who is ultimately responsible for good grades? The Teacher? The Student? Or is it a combined effort of teachers students and parents? It has long since been established that students with involved parents achieve higher academic performance. Yet we are so quick to blame the teachers! So maybe instead of paying teachers on merit, if we really want to try something new, why not start a formative assessment of the degree to which teachers, students and parents can collaborate? Learning should occur in these triads, and if any particular triad is failing, then special measures can be offered. As I said, a fatter paycheck isn't the answer; on the contrary, smaller classes, more time and meaningful connections with people will definately improve one's quality of life; after all, It takes a community to raise children. This would be a truly revolutionary form of Socio Emotional learning. To answer your question about motivation. What really drives a teacher? Most teachers I know didn't get into it for the money. However, a better quality of life is an intrinsic motivator, whereas more money is only extrinsic. Most teachers would like to have more time, flexibility and a smaller focus group.
Thanks Miles! I like the idea
Thanks Miles! I like the idea of the triad of responsibility--and responsiveness. And I think you're absolutely right about blaming teachers...and schools, in general.
There is a sense in which, on the one hand, we do all of this research on what REALLY works when it comes to teaching and learning, but when push comes to shove, we try to bring what we've discovered is a very complex process and try to simplify it. And in doing so, we always lose the sense of complexity.
There are those that will respond with what has become a type of truism: "The teacher is the most important school-based factor affecting school success." Well, yes, but what you have suggested is that this one factor must be nurtured within the context of that sense of shared responsibility.
I hope I'm reading you correctly.
I suppose that the "better quality of life" factors would translate into working conditions when placed in the context of collective agreements? For me, the flexibility factor is the one that I would like to explore more.
Thanks again for your participation.
Others?
Merit pay seems like a simple
Merit pay seems like a simple solution to a perceived problem. There is very little proof to sustain the premise that merit pay improves kids' learning. A lot of time effort and money would go to setting it up and to figuring out standards that would be equitable to compare teacher performance. That money, effort and time would be far better spent on PD and other support for teachers who are struggling, for principals and superintendents to spend more time in their roles as "head teachers" or "lead educators". Time, effort and money could also be invested in community and parent support as everyone travels the road of education transformation.
At its heart, merit pay is an insult. The implication is that one is not well enough trusted to do one's job as a professional, one has to be rewarded with tangible benefits. This creates and sustains a culture of competition, not collaboration; anxiety, not quiet competency. Because no matter how good you are at what you do, someone else is always coming up behind. So keep looking over your shoulder - behind you, not ahead to the goal. That environment is counterproductive to innovation, to (appropriate) risk-taking in a world where the one constant is the unprecedented scope and pace of change. And that will not improve practice nor contribute to student success. What about providing the best work environment for teaching/learning? What about seeing how that works as a motivator?
I agree with you merit pay
I agree with you merit pay isn't the solution. All of your points are completely reasonable.
I wonder what we can do though to encourage more people to work in the high needs schools. The school I worked at in Brooklyn was a revolving door for new teachers, had a couple of experienced staff that were sticking it out, and some highly disfunctional teachers who could find jobs no where else. I'm sure there are similar situations here in Canada. What can we do to encourage more experienced teachers to work in these types of schools? Would greater incentives work?
Not trying to be stereotypical here, but a school on the West end of Vancouver is just going to be easier and less stressful to work in than one where you have a much greater ESL population and more gang violence like some of the schools in Surrey. Maybe Surrey teachers should be paid more?
Another take on the question
Another take on the question that David raises: I have actually found that I prefer to work in areas that many would consider a little more contentious or "harder to serve". Now I don't have the New York experiences that David has had, but I have worked in some areas where creativity, flexibility and alternative approaches are necessary and effective. Hard work, but satisfying on many different levels.
I'm not sure that a merit pay system based on year-over-year student performance would have allowed me the freedom to look for different ways of connecting with students, of the autonomy that I have had to design programs that worked for these students.
Ah, now this is a different
Ah, now this is a different question. This is not merit pay. This is more like Northern Allowance, where local conditions dictate a higher pay grade. If a school is "failing" - for whatever reason, by whatever measure - shouldn't the very best resources be applied? For instance, if you are a teacher who has developed a highly successful literacy program in the rare and salubrious environment of one of those West Van schools, why would you not leap at the chance to initiate a program in a school where literacy rates were low? Especially if you were granted autonomy in the implementation? Especially if you were given the necessary support, resources and leadership? Could you resist the challenge and ultimate potential "pay-off" of professional satisfaction?
Great comments. Esme's
Great comments. Esme's (sorry, I don't how to apply the proper accent) remarks about innovation and autonomy are particularly poignant. Daniel Pink's claim would be that, once people are paid at a reasonable level, the ability to be autonomous is much more motivating than additional money. I tend to agree, and have found the same dynamic at work in my own professional life. There are many situations where I would agree to take less money, if I could work in the way that I wanted.