I caught part of Laura Knoy's show on NHPR today, discussing merit pay in the public schools. Obama has endorsed the idea.
There have been a few public school teachers in my family. They all worked here in New Hampshire; Obama's experience in Chicago was undoubtedly different.
I come to a different conclusion than the President: I think the idea is foolish, ignorant, and insulting.
I've spent most of my career in the private sector. In that time I have never had my annual raise or opportunity for promotion based on the sort of crisp clear metrics that 'merit pay' proponents claim we can have for teachers. Maybe that's because no business professors at the Wharton School have figured out an effective, quantitative merit rating system.
But I've never worked in sales. That's the one area I know of, where compensation is closely tied to simple numeric ratios agreed upon in advance.
I gather there are plum territories and assignments for people in sales. One of the things I worry about with merit pay is: the incentive for individual teachers to find groups of privileged students that you can expect to succeed no matter how effective you are. There will also be "bad territories:" generally, I'm guessing, the kids who most need help.
Every now and then newspapers - the Union Leader, but other papers who should be ashamed of themselves too - print the salaries of the school teachers right alongside their names. It's a matter of public record; that's a solid story. (It's also a cheap story that requires no shoe leather and analysis at all, a gossip column moved to the front page.)
As a private sector worker, I've never had my salary printed in the paper as gossip fodder. But if we institute a merit system for teachers, those scores will end up on the front page. It won't just be Miss Beasley's salary - the seventh-graders will be whispering about her merit rating too.
This way of treating teachers? It's a big part of why I am not a teacher.
Let's stipulate: there are bad, burned-out, and lazy teachers. Now let's think and further stipulate: merit pay doesn't eliminate them. It lets them continue with lower raises each year.
Oh, the plan doesn't stop there? You expect it to grow and allow firing low-rated teachers despite tenure? That could be a good idea, I suppose. Why are the proponents hiding that part of the plan, if it exists?
If merit pay for teachers is such a great idea blocked by a powerful public teachers union - why isn't it the standard in private schools? Why isn't it the standard in colleges and universities? These other, similar institutions in much different political and economic environments haven't found a Magic Scorecard...
