Debate on incentive pay
for teachers increases

With the implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act, area schools are still working out ways to provide incentive to teachers to improve the quality of education

By ANGELA SHUFF
Reporting
Spring 2003

HARRISBURG, Pa. - In light of the No Child Left Behind Act signed by President Bush on January 8, 2002, which insists that states set high testing standards for every child in grades three through eight, the issue of merit pay for teachers has become a hot topic in an attempt to boost teacher effectiveness.

Since the end of World War II, a single salary schedule based on experience and training has been the dominant model of compensation for teachers.  The single salary model provides for fairness and helps to professionalize teachers by offering higher salary to those who have degrees beyond the baccalaureate level. 

Others involved in educational reform insist that the top-down method of compensation is detrimental to quality education.  Alternative models of compensation include skill-based pay, market-based pay, contingency pay, and school performance awards, and merit pay. 

“I think that merit pay must come to education,” said Greg Stevens, a teacher and former union negotiator.  “We have too many bad teachers whom administrators won’t fire.”

In a recent study on existing performance based compensation systems for teachers, Anita Summers and David Crawford found that 34 percent of teachers in nonreligious private schools receive merit-based pay, as opposed to 14 percent in public schools. 

Philadelphia’s school district has been operating on a merit-based model since 1997 and has seen significant positive results.  Bonus awards are given to clusters of schools based on the attainment of target goals.  There are 22 clusters, which are organized around neighborhoods. 

In 1997 only one cluster was below the first target goal and two clusters were below the second target goal.  The performance index for grades four, eight, and 11 in reading, math, and science increased from 1996 to 1998. 

Tredyffrin School District in Berwyn, Pa. implemented a merit-based model in 1970, but it was terminated in 1990 for financial reasons.  The program was criticized for subjectivity, and no formal evaluation was conducted to discern the impact on students.

Colonial School District in Plymouth Meeting, Pa. implemented a merit-based model in 1999.  Compensation included bonus awards for individual teachers, and groups of teachers.  Between 10 and 20 percent of teachers received awards based on standardized tests, school district tests, and portfolio measures.  Bonus awards for teachers range from $1,389 to $2,778 depending on the number of awards.  The impact on the quality of education has not yet been determined.

A recent Urban Institute analysis of merit pay systems in Pennsylvania found that school districts in the southeastern and mideastern regions (Downingtown, Great Valley, Lower Merion, and Upper Darby) implemented merit pay systems in the late 1970’s, which were all abandoned in favor of pay based on experience.  In these school districts, merit pay caused inequities among teachers with similar skills and teacher morale was dramatically lowered.

The traditional salary schedule stresses the importance of rewarding experience and educational attainment.  Those opposed to merit pay are concerned that it encourages administrators to evaluate aspects of teaching that can be measured only by tests.  “If teachers are rewarded for their students’ test scores I’m afraid teachers will start teaching only toward the test,” said Alan Muchmore of Harrisburg Christian School.

Jemry Small, principal of Highland Elementary School, explains that merit pay is a wonderful idea, only if it is carried out objectively.  “I could easily arrange the classrooms so that all of the gifted children are with one or two teachers, therefore giving myself a reason to reward teachers through my own bias,” she said.

“Operation Public Education” in Harrisburg, Pa. seeks to reform how students learn and how teachers teach.  This initiative includes value-added assessment, which looks at a students learning over a period of time instead of one-time test scores. 

Jim Rhoades, chairman of the Senate Education Committee wishes to create accountability beyond value-added assessment.  As reported in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Rhoades wants teachers to be rewarded for quality performance.  He envisions a system where new teachers begin as novices and spend up to six years moving through different levels before they reach the career teacher level.  Teachers of students that consistently achieve beyond the expectations will receive even higher pay. 

The analysis would come from a database of the teachers’ performance, therefore eliminating the possibility of a subjective analysis and the term merit pay.  But the cost of teacher raises, and changes that would have to be made in the way teachers are taught keep this new concept under scrutiny.

“I would love to reward teachers that go above and beyond,” said Small.  She believes the No Child Left Behind Act is a great way to make every child a priority, but she complains that the government has not provided any funding for the individual schools to meet these goals. 

Todd Stoltz, principal of Shimmel School, said he cannot whine and complain about not having enough money to accomplish goals, but will do whatever needs to be done to improve.  However, the administration at Shimmel is not sure that merit pay is the answer.  “We shouldn’t have to provide incentives for teachers to do their jobs,” said Kristy Sgrignoli, instructional facilitator.

A plan such as the new No Child Left Behind Act requires strict accountability between teachers and administration.  Whether or not merit pay could provide the incentive needed for teachers to improve education depends on how objectively the system is designed and how it is adequately funded.

All stories in this magazine are the intellectual property of the individual authors.

You may email comments about this story to: ams623@psu.edu