An Education Ordeal

 “Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world. This report is concerned with only one of the many causes and dimensions of the problem, but it is the one that undergirds American prosperity, security, and civility. We report to the American people that while we can take justifiable pride in what our schools and colleges have historically accomplished and contributed to the United States and the well-being of its people, the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people. What was unimaginable a generation ago has begun to occur-- others are matching and surpassing our educational attainments.

 Our society and its educational institutions seem to have lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectations and disciplined effort needed to attain them.” (The National Commission on Excellence in Education)

In countries with more successful education systems than ours, teachers are generally better paid than their American counterparts. They are paid like Engineers and Architects and, as a result, are respected like Doctors. Today, in America, we face an education crisis. Educators are underpaid, students’ test scores are falling behind the scores of their international peers, and critical thinking skills have been lost to an overwhelming emphasis on standardized test scores. As the old idiom goes: “Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.” Teachers, policymakers, and parents must now be re-educated themselves and we must all work to find a new solution to an outdated, deeply flawed, and clearly failing system of education. 

  If we were to pay our teachers based on the performance of their students could we effectively raise teacher salaries, create incentives for teachers to raise student test scores, and weed out any underperforming or unenthused educators? What if you were told that so-called “Merit Pay” systems achieve all of these things, and more? Public school teachers should be paid based on their performance because teacher and student performance increase under this system, which is the entire goal of education.
                                                                                                           

   So if our current system of education is so broken, what exactly makes it so broken? The United States, as of 2013, ranks 17th among 34 tested countries, falling short of such countries as Korea, Japan, Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy and Spain.
  Strangely though the United States ranks as the 5th highest spending (per student) nation, spending an average of $115,000 per student. Comparatively, the Slovak Republic (who happened to score 16th out of the 34 tested nations, that is, just above the United States) spends only $53,000 per student.

   Education in America has remained largely unchanged, even stagnate, in recent history. It was only a short 60 years ago in the “Brown v Board of Education” case that racial segregation was outlawed in American public schools and only 34 years ago that The U.S. Department of Education was elevated to Cabinet level status. 12 years ago President Bush enacted the “No Child Left Behind Act” to provide better schooling options in low-performing areas. Outside of these acts, and the occasional funding Bill, what major changes has our education system really seen?

     In an eighteen-page article called Merit Pay and the Evaluation Problem: Why Most Merit Plans Fail and a Few Survive, Richard J. Murnane and David K. Cohen, who boast numerous achievements in several areas of research and writing, especially in fields of education, utilize microeconomics to outline why merit pay is not a solid idea for schools, yet certain piece-rate contracts work in other job areas. They begin by stating, “merit pay is an old idea,” (Murnane, 2). They hark back to 1918, when, at that time, 48% of schools tried merit pay. Over the next five to ten years, it steadily decreased, and interest continued to wane to the point that it was nearly nonexistent in 1979.

     They may do well in pointing out the supposed failure of merit pay with studies over the years, but the last study they outline was in 1979. Seven years later, this study was conducted, in 1986. Who is to say that there isn't evidence in between that seven-year gap that goes against their article? And since a near 30-year gap has occurred in between their study and the current year, what if still more evidence exists to further back the point that merit pay is a good idea?

     Although this article was written in the mid-80's, it's merely falling into the “if it didn't work then, it won't work now” attitude, which isn't the best way of going about things. Plus, wouldn't almost anyone think that if a worker were paid more, they would be more willing to work harder to keep such a pay rate? There's a great quote by the late comedian George Carlin that perfectly accents work enthusiasm when it comes to an issue involving salary in their profession: “Most people work just hard enough not to get fired and get paid just enough money not to quit.” If a teacher gets settled in at a school for a few years and has no real opportunity of making more than they're making at the time, is it logical to think that they'll be more willing to continually work harder to advance their students, the students grades, and the classroom ambiance than they would if they made more based on their performance? It's sad, but it further accentuates the fact that if you're monetarily awarding a teacher based on fantastic grades, SAT scores, and an overall positive spirit, then they just may get the encouragement they need to keep up that high level of professional attitude that any student would seek from a teacher or professor.

     If this is what it takes for education to become better in this nation, then so be it. A talented teacher needs to be compensated considerably, and whether this is the main aim of a teacher – their salary, or the fact that they want to better the world because that is their lifelong passion – then it needs to happen now. Why are celebrities so hailed and celebrated and paid millions and millions of dollars for one film when teachers don't make near the amount they should for much more important work over a span of many years?

So, how would Murnane and Cohen feel about their study almost thirty years later? They seem very set on putting down the possibility of merit pay returning, yet they also. Real-world experimentation proves that merit pay can indeed be successful especially when judging its level of success by the effects the teachers feel the program has had upon their abilities and incentive to perform and on the success of their students.

     The duo also talk about “two districts” in their sample “that have had merit pay for more than twenty years” (Murnane, 13). One of the districts contained a “make everyone feel special” strategy, which involved quietly awarding teachers based on their performance, with yearly awards ranging from no award to $2,000. They both go on to say: “Teachers whom we interviewed in this district were unaware of the distribution of actual awards but typically were pleased that they each received a substantial award. In fact, every teacher who participated in the voluntary merit pay program (over 90 percent of eligible teachers in the district) received an award; 85 percent of the teachers received either $1,500 or $2,000.” This occurred without them knowing, and this states that 85% (a large number) received some of the highest awards without even being aware of it. But, 85% does not equate to 100%. What if this was utilized in many more (if not all) districts, and what if it was a known fact around the school? It would be interesting to see those results, because why couldn't roughly 85% of all teachers (not just teachers in two districts, where 85% is an easy number to obtain compared to 85% of all schools) manage the highest reward categories, if not more?

“Teacher Compensation Around The Globe”, by Susan Sclafani, the director of state services at the National Center for Education and the Economy in Washington D.C., makes an incredible point that really stands to highlight the entirety of why merit pay is a great idea for teachers worldwide: “Evidence has emerged that clearly identifies the teacher as one of the single most important factors in a student's learning” (Sclafani, 2). Thus, the more effective and talented a teacher is, the higher the chance the teacher has of melding the minds of his or her students into something grandiose.

     However, she also points out that great teachers are also in short supply worldwide for many reasons, which can involve a lack of teaching interest in young people, a lack of teachers in a certain county or state, or, more specifically, a lack of teachers in a specific subject, which can prove to be a real problem when it comes to hiring a competent and talented teacher. At that point, you'd almost be forced to hire the first person that comes along in, say, science, math, etc. if you really need the position filled. But, what is it that has lessened the interest to teach? Have students become so tired of schooling at this day and age that they don't want to jump back into it yet again by teaching? Do they not find any subjects particularly interesting to teach? Or, perhaps, does the problem lie with the lack of big money they're given for such a highly important role?

    Sclafani points out some great evidence of pay for performance programs working in many countries such as Chile, Mexico, India, Israel, and Kenya, with some of them adapting certain pay policies that greatly mirror the same types found in certain districts throughout the United States. The National System of Performance Assessment (or the acronym SNED, in Spanish), for example, gives rewards to “the schools that have a chance of reaching the top 25%,” which they've found to be very successful in countries such as Chile (Sclafani, 4).

     In the end, while the programs most certainly vary from district to district and country to country, it's quite hard to deny the fact that they most certainly do work and can't do any harm if they're continued, which they should be. Sclafani states, “incentive programs in Chile, India, Israel, Kenya, and Mexico indicate that many factors influence the behavior of teachers, only some of whom are influenced by incentives” (Sclafani, 5). Either way, if incentives are introduced, this perfectly states that teaching effectiveness could only go upward, especially if these well-designed incentive programs are fine tuned to accompany the teachers of all subjects, districts, states, and countries.

     So, is merit pay a good idea? Would it harm or help the teachers who just might lack the proper incentive to do a little bit better each day? The only way to find out is to continue these programs, branch them out even further, and tweak them in such a way that everyone is happy, and everyone can get rewarded if they put enough work into helping the students become all they can be. Now this leaves the question of whether or not this would work if students were rewarded like this if they got great grades...

Works Cited:

< Murnane, Richard J., and David K. Cohen. "Merit Pay and the Evaluation Problem: Why Most Merit Pay Plans Fail and a Few Survive." . Harvard University, 1 Feb. 1986. Web. 24 Oct. 2014.>

< Sclafani, Susan. "Teacher Compensation Around the Globe." Phi Delta Kappa International. Phi Delta Kappan, 1 May 2010. Web. 26 Oct. 2014.>