Written by Valerie Huang
Edited by Advika Vuppala
The United States is notorious for underpaying teachers. In the past few years, this has driven many burnt-out, unappreciated teachers to resign from their positions. Some school districts, unwilling to give teachers a valuable pay raise, have implemented merit pay systems. These systems compensate teachers partly based on an evaluation of their job performance through a set of criteria. Although supporters of merit pay would argue that it motivates teachers to work harder, merit pay is ultimately detrimental to school systems since it awards based on unfair standards, prioritizes grades over learning, and creates a competitive environment between teachers.
Merit pay is often awarded on biased and unfair standards, since academic success is difficult to quantify by concrete standards. Factors such as graduation rates, winning sports teams, and successful theater performances vary widely and cannot alone define success (Greene). Some merit pay systems are based on standardized test scores. Although these scores seem like an accurate measure of a school’s success rate, they also vary widely. Each state in the U.S. has a different set of standardized tests for subjects such as math or English. Sometimes individual districts have different assessments, causing certain districts’ teachers to earn more money because their students’ tests were easier (Gabor). Most importantly, these “quantifiable” factors fail to measure the other important qualities of teachers, such as their ability to explain content clearly and the effort they put into their lesson plans. Passionate teachers who teach in certain areas may not receive merit pay simply because their region’s standardized test is harder.
Furthermore, merit pay simply exacerbates the prioritizing of grades over learning. This issue, already prevalent in the American school system, damages future generations as education becomes less meaningful. Especially in high school, students develop the mindset of cramming for an A on an exam rather than learning to expand their knowledge. With the introduction of merit pay, this issue is further extended in the education system, since teachers may be tempted to grade less harshly so that they can earn more income (Kokemuller). Students expect to earn high grades in class, so teachers who grade “harder” are villainized (“Grade Inflation”). In addition, this grade inflation has the unintended consequence of harming students in the long term. Students may lose motivation to excel in school because they get the same grade as their “average” peers, greatly harming their work ethic and making the identification of top students more difficult (“Grade Inflation”).
Finally, merit pay causes unhealthy competition between teachers. They are more reluctant to share lessons and resources since there is a limited amount of merit pay. This ultimately creates a tense working environment, filled with teachers who want to earn more money than their colleagues (“Pros and Cons”). Merit pay also does not account for economic situations, causing a further imbalance between teachers at poorer and wealthier schools. Many students in wealthier areas have access to tutors and online resources, while students in poorer areas lack the economic resources to receive supplemental education. In districts with established merit pay systems, the competition for a bonus becomes extremely unfair because teachers in poorer areas start at a disadvantage (Messerli).
Without implementing a permanent solution to help teachers receive sufficient pay, more and more teachers will leave the profession, and the United States will experience an emergency in its education system. In the end, the merit pay system only serves to harm students and future industries, leading to a workforce with less knowledge and less motivation.
Sources
Gabor, Andrea. “Why Pay Incentives Are Destined to Fail.” Education Week, Education Week, 20 Sept. 2010, https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/opinion-why-pay-incentives-are-destined-to-fail/2010/09.
Greene, Peter. “Teacher Merit Pay Is a Bad Idea.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 9 Feb. 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2019/02/09/teacher-merit-pay-is-a-bad-idea/?sh=3bf7091c4ffb.
“How Grade Inflation Hurts Students.” Resilient Educator, https://resilienteducator.com/classroom-resources/how-grade-inflation-hurts-students/.
Kokemuller, Neil. “Tenure Vs. Merit Pay.” Chron, 17 June 2022, https://work.chron.com/tenure-vs-merit-pay-5869.html.
Messerli, Joe. “Should Teacher Pay Be Based on Performance?” BalancedPolitics.org, 8 Dec. 2011, https://www.balancedpolitics.org/teacher_merit_pay.htm.
“The Pros and Cons of Merit Based Pay for Teachers.” Teach.com, 9 Aug. 2012, https://teach.com/resources/the-pros-and-cons-of-merit-based-pay-for-teachers/.
Comments