Should Teacher Pay be based on Student Performance?
In order to implement any pay system and merit-based pay in the companies it is essential that these organizaions define their terms and goals as well as clearly outline the pupose of the programs that ar being implemented. Educational field is not an exception (Gratz, 2009) and many organizations are looking for effectibv ways to implement performance pay. But what Performance Pay actually mean and how shoud it be defined and measured? It is critical to understad that perfomance-based compenation is a way to reward employees and demonstrates areas for improvement. This only works in the environment, which offers transparency and clarity in employment relationships.
Many studies conducted in the past decades outline examples of the companies, which successfully implemented performance-based pay and that continue utilizing this approach, constantly innovating and improving it. Educational system, in its private or public area, is also subject to this discussion. Many argue, however, that education should not be seen as business and, thus, can not follow the trends and models, application to the employment relationships in a typical business environment.Others, however, note that in the contemporary business and social environment, the relaitonships developed by groups and individuals are significantly more complex and multifaeted. That said, educational system needs to be innovate and create newopportnities and ways to improve and become more effective (Heneman and Warner, 2005).
Heneman and Werner (2005) give a clear following definition of the performance pay. The authors state that merit pay is an incentive form of compensation that the company provides to its employees for the services. Under performance pay the pay is allocated to employees according to their performance based on previously set and discussed measurable objectives and goals. Under this payment plan, salary increase and bonuses are given to employees for their services on the basis of relatively subjective judgemnet of employee merit during defined period of time.
There is a great variety of opninoins in academic and professional world with regards to the benefits and cons of the performance-based approach to employee compenation. Swanson and Elwood (2009) outline the importance of the Human Resource Management (HRM) as part of the high-level strategy of the company and talk about the need to develop special incentive schemes to direct employee efforts in a way to maximize profitability and productivity of the company. Indeed, there are several advantages for the companies that adapt one or another form of employee-incentive programs in it HRM structure. First of all, performance pay is an effective way to reward employees for good job. It allows the company to increase productivity through attractive motivational schemes and clear communication of goals thtoughout the company´s corporate levels (Hays, 1999). Additionally, merit pay creates collaboration in the companies where employee-incentive pay programs truly work. It should also be mentioned that the implemnetation of the performance pay in schools and universities can allow these organizations address some of the most common business issues, such lack of motivation fo particular roles in education system due to low pay, such as teaching in elementary schools or preference for private sector as opposed to public. Additionally, performance pay can elp the organization to build on strong bonds between all three core stakeholders, teachers, management and students,but making organizational goals and expectations transparable and undestandable to all the sides (Sims, 2007).
On the other hand, many specialists and the companies themselves outline several major issues, asociated with performance pay. First of all, in many situation, merit pay plans incentivize competition between employees rather collaboration. Secondly, performance-based pay in a short term can create additional motivation in employees to perform better and strive for higher result. I a long term, the differences in personalities often demonstate that employees thatare used to work under srict guidance and follow the routine often become demotivated with the objectives and goals that force them entering in competition with their colleagues.. Finally, performance-based schemes are a subjective way to measure individual performance (Gumming and Warley, 2015). In the companies, where senior and middle management are well-trained and motivated to make this plan work, performance evaluation is a fair and beneficial process. Unfortunately, in many situations, companies lack internal skills and expertise to implement objective measures and place further pressure on relaitonships between different stakeholders within the organization (Sims, 2007). For the environments, where compensation is based on the performance of other individuals, such as department managers performance appraisal that is based on the results of each individual, working for department, or the situaion where teacher pay is based on student performance, individuals with particular backgrounds and level of emotional intelligence can become very adverse to the suggested approach to compensation.
Podgursly and Springer (2007) argue that unions are socialists in their philosophy and view on educational system. According the unions as much as educational system should not reat students differently it cannot allow differentiated treatment, based on performance of teachers. With that in mind, unions see performance-based pay as discrimination practice and inequitable practice by definition. It is possible to argue that the position of unions at that point in time promotes the attitude, where groups are forced to see their relationships as “us against them”. That said, teachers are often opposed to students, good students are often opposed to bed students etc (Podgursky and Springer, 2007). Many supporters of this position in unions believe that teachers should be mainly motivated by the substantive mission of the teaching and will not respond well to monetary incentives (The Council of State Governments, 2011).
While there are certain bodies that continue arguing against performance-based pay, others find a number of empirical evidence in favor of the same. The Council of State Governments (2011) provides strong empirical data that countries, where educational system have adapted performance pay system demonstrate better results in math, reading and science. Additonally, it should be noted that performance pay creates addiotional motivation for the groups, such as students and teachers, to work together for a common goal. Performance pay in educational system is also a way to build on healthy levels of competition that drive performance and improve overall effectiveness of educational system. Another important argument in favor of the merit pay in educational system is the role that it may play in eliminating old stereotypes from educational system. As such, there is a common believe that elementary school teachers demand less skills and, thus, should be paid less. Performance pay would be able to create a new and more objective measure for the teacher performance across the levels and types of institutions, rather than assumption based on subjective judgements. The Council of State Government (2011) quotes Stephen Wise, Senator for Florida State, that argues that teacher should not be compensated based on longevity. Some professionals are more effective at their job than the others and this higher level of effectiveness should be adequatly and accordingly compensated through implementing student performance as a variable of performance-based pay for teachers. Finally, performance-based plans and systems within the organizations, once implemnted and managed accurately, can not only reward performance, but also create awareness between individuals about the values and goals of the educational institution. While the above arguments talk in favor of performance-based pay in educational system, there are several considerations and conditions that are to be met in order to ensure effectiveness of this approach in educational environment. Transparency and clarity are the key to success of employee-incentive pay in education.
Overall argument against the performance-based pay in educational system is based upon the assumption that subjective nature of the goals and measures created for teacher builds on the competition and cannot become an effecitve motivator for individuals that teach others. One of the common arguments agains the merit pay for teachers is the falsification of the student’s tests to improve the resuts and meet the objectives set on individual level by the educational insitution. Secondly, the opposers of the merit pay emphasize that merit pay incentivize unhealthy competition rather than builds on cooperation between colleagues. Another important arguemnet that education should not be seen and developed as a business, and, thus, should not build on business-like compensation schemes. Finally, performance-based pay often will create adverse attitude among teachers towards students that demonstrate poor performance. There chalenging students will fall out from the focus of educational system. The point that should be made here is that any merit pay scheme demands very high level of emotional intelligence from individuals who are subject to it. While accurate measures and objectives can build on cooperative and healthy corporate environment, lack of skills and training for teachers with regards to the structure and ethical side of performance-based pay will result in underperformance and can be destructive for educational institution. The argument here, therefore, is that performance-based compensatio system can only be effective in institutions that providecontinuous training and follow up systems for its employees Yaeger and Sorensen, 2009).
In conclusion, this discussion should emphasize the importance of consideration of educational industry as a unique sector. On one side, it should be seen from commercial perspective and analysed from the perspective of classic business models and frameworks. Yet, the product and servic, offered by the educational institutions are unique in a way they involve ethical and morl grounds. Professionals working in the industry are often driven by very specific motiation and personal reasons to teach. With that in mind, any compensation scheme and pay strategy, should be adequatey prepared and well-thought to fit into the culture and specificity of the educational industry. As a rule, merit pay is ane extremely useful and effective tool for personal development strategy. It can also provide visible and tangible benefits for the core stakeholders, teachers, management and students.
The view that this essay takes on performance-based pay is extremely positive. Accordingly, I argue in favor of performance pay for teachers and strongly believe that accurate implementation of taylored employee-incentive compensation strategy within educational institutions can offer significant advantage over classic salary systems that reward longivity and lack focus on cooperation between student and teachers (Lazear, 1996). In essence, performance pay can effectively address some of the major issues and challenges that educational industry is facing today: rewarding high performers; creating common goals for all the stakeholder within the organization; building on bonds between student and teachers, other than personal sympathy; addressing low pay issues in elementary schools and high salary disparity between private and public sectors.
References
Swanson R.A. and Elwood F.H.. (2009). Foundation of Human Resource Development. 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Barret-Koehler.
Ronald R. Sims. (2007). Human Resource Management. Contemporary Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Gummings T.C. and Worley C.G. (2015). Organizational Development and Change. 10th Edition. Stamford: Cengage Learning.
Yaeger T.F. and Sorensen P.F. (2009). Strategic Organizational Development: Managing Change for Success. New York: Information Age Publishing.
The Council of State Governments (2011). Does Merit Pay for Teachers Have Merit? Pros and Cons f New Models For Teacher Compensation. Council of State Government. Capitol Research. Retrieved 19 April 2016, http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/Does_Merit_Pay_For_Teachers_Have_Merit_.pdf
Woessmann L. (2011). Countries with Perforance Pay for Teachers Score Higher on PISA Tests. Merit Pay International [Online]. Retrieved 20 April 2016, http://educationnext.org/files/ednext_20112_Woessmann.pdf
Lazear E.P. (1996). Performance Pay and Productivity. NBER Working Paper. Cambrindge: National Bureau of Economic Research [Online]. Retrieved 20 April 2016, http://www.nber.org/papers/w5672.pdf
Podgursky M. and Springer M. (2007). Teacher Performance Pay: A Review. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. Vol. 26, Issue 4: 909-949. Retrieved 19 April 2016, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Matthew_Springer/publication/227350962_Teacher_performance_pay_A_review/links/0046352d973ed29c64000000.pdf
Gratz D. B. (2009). The Peril and Promise of Performance Pay. Making Education Compensation Work. Plymouth: Rowman and Littlefield Education. Print.
Heneman R. Werner J. M. (2005). Merit Pay. Linking Pay to Performance in a Changing World. 2nd Edition.Greenwich: Information Age Publishing. Print.
Hays S (1999). Proz and Cons of Pay for Performance. Workforce [Online]. Retrieved 20 April 2016, http://www.workforce.com/articles/pros-cons-of-pay-for-performance
