Pay for Performance

November 17th, 2014

As the U.S. education system transitioned from a traditional pay structure to a performance pay system, the quality of education provided to children has rapidly diminished. The outcome of this transition was teachers being rewarded with a higher salary at the cost of improving the education every student receives. While education reform aimed to better our education system, it leaves us today in a poorer state than before.

A critical issue with the performance pay system is the fact that providing monetary incentives to higher performing teachers increases performance quantity rather than quality. This type of incentive model is more effective for simple tasks or in an industry such as manufacturing where an employee can be rewarded for the amount of product they produce. However, in the world of education, increasing performance quantity can only be displayed by the number of students who meet a certain quantitative requirement while failing to address the quality of the knowledge and information students have acquired. Additionally, the morale of teachers is strongly affected by this system, as the job satisfaction of educators is strictly dependent on where their salary lies on the pay structure.

When examining the way students' knowledge and learning are tested, pay for performance relies on the results provided by standardized testing. Issues are found within this model of rating performance due to the fact that quantitative results fail to capture the full breadth of learning that students experience. The shortcoming of this type of evaluation is seen by the difficulty to establish a quantitative means to measure knowledge that also addresses knowledge and expectations that are developed and acquired outside of the classroom. Ultimately, educators in this system are left with the option of teaching to the test. By understanding the material that students will be tested on, teachers can adjust the topics and concepts they teach to adhere to the material that will appear on the test. Unfortunately, the overall education provided to students is compromised to encompass a very narrow view of subjects and tends to rely on the test taking skills they have or learn over time.

Teachers typically enter the education field because they are more motivated by student's learning rather than a large salary. As with most public sector employees, such employees are much more likely to be mission driven and motivated by the overarching organizational goals. A performance pay structure has the tendency to undermine the desire to provide a public service and entices people who are motivated by money into the education system. In doing so, much of the intrinsic motivation that leads teachers into the education field is lost and replaced by the extrinsic motivator of money.

Addressing pay for performance teaching at a functional level, it introduces unfairness toward the teachers and alters the teaching environment of schools. More importantly, performance pay places the burden upon teachers for poor student performance and completely ignores factors outside of a teacher's control such as family inputs or distractions while in a testing environment. The result of teacher's inability to affect such factors on a performance pay schedule is the appearance of random variation on teacher's salaries. Even more damaging is the reduction in collaboration among teachers due to performance pay. Performance pay diminishes sharing notes among educators, mentoring of younger teachers, and any type of team-teaching atmosphere. Essentially, the nature of performance pay places teachers in schools at odds with one another and forms an environment based upon competition.

In the broad scheme of education, performance pay simply depletes the standard principles that encompass teaching. The education provided to children is sacrificed for a desire to garner a higher salary through unethical teaching practices. Overall, the performance pay system fails the greater good of society because the product of education is neither a good nor a service and the quality of education remains hard to measure and express. If we continue to move forward with performance pay in the education sector, we not only place the education of our children at risk, but risk the overall success of the entire education system.

Related Resources:

• Andrew Leigh. "The Economics and Politics of Teacher Merit Pay." CESifo Economic Studies, 59: 1-33, 2013.