Merit Pay: A Way to Better Teaching

Should a teacher’s salary reflect the test scores produced by that educator’s students? That is the idea behind the practice of merit pay. The debate over this question is currently in full sway in both local arenas and on Capital Hill. Some might say that this system is inherently unfair because the quality of the school or the ability of the students might be unequal and therefore give an advantage to a teacher in a wealthy area whose students are given all the tools necessary to achieve on a standardized test. One Oklahoma teacher, Barry Beauchamp, claimed that merit pay based simply on test scores is “not fair to the students or the teachers.” He claims that you can’t “look at every teacher and say they should achieve exactly the same thing.” Beauchamp says that this is due to the fact that the instructor’s are dealing with different subjects, different students, and different issues.

Yet, there are several examples of the effectiveness of merit pay. In Little Rock, Arkansas, one school has discovered the advantages of this approach. A few years ago they implemented a plan that would reward teachers for higher test scores (merit pay) and the results have been very promising. Vanderbilt University has gone so far as to create a research program to investigate the worth of the merit pay system. In fact, the aforementioned Arkansas school took part in this study and it was found that test (sample answer sheet shown below) results went up seven percentage points when compared to a similar school that was not giving bonuses to its instructors. The only real problem seen by most prognosticators is how the public would react to the utilization of such an arrangement. This question was answered when the voters in Denver decided to take a tax hike in order to increase teachers’ salaries through the merit pay system.

The only group standing in the way of a federally sponsored implementation of this method is, and this will be a surprise to most people, a teacher's union. Specifically, the National Education Association and its leader, Reg Weaver(top left photo), opposed a bill being proposed by California Representative George Miller that would include merit pay in an updated version of the No Child Left Behind education law. In an Associated Press article, Weaver states his belief that the decisions as to who is eligible and what constitutes an improvement in test scores should be decided locally rather than at a national level. The article goes on to explain that Weaver had earlier stated his support for merit pay and how his flip-flopping angered the aforementioned California Representative.

Despite Weaver’s sudden opposition to this method, most teachers are pushing for merit pay. They believe that it is the only way to make their salaries respectable. So, this system is not only intended to increase test scores, but to give teacher’s a much deserved pay raise.

Is this system completely fair? Probably not, but nothing is perfect. Most people who have knowledge of this situation agree that the pros outweigh the cons. If, as the Vanderbilt study suggests, the system works, why not use it? Even Mr. Beauchamp agrees that merit pay would work regardless of whether or not it favors certain educators because of the subject they happen to teach. Even in the face of scattered criticism, merit pay is taking off as is illustrated by its spreading to Tennessee, Florida, and Minnesota: It is also being considered by a number of other states. Needless to say, merit pay looks like its here to stay and I, for one, think that is a good thing; teachers deserve to be paid more than what they’re getting now and more importantly, the system works. If it’s raising test scores, the students are getting a better education and everyone benefits. It certainly seems like its worth a few extra dollars in taxes if the returns are so positive.