Teachers Deserve Merit Pay, Not Special Interest Pay

Share

Teachers need more money, according to a new survey by the AmericanFederation of Teachers. Noting that teacher salaries last year climbed 3.2percent, or 0.2 percent less than inflation, AFT president Sandra Feldmansaid, "Salaries must at least become competitive to attract and keep qualityteachers."

But at $42,000, the average teacher’s salary is not bad, particularly for ajob with a three-month summer vacation. Still, the union's pleas for higherpay are not surprising. After all, unions exist in part to negotiate higherwages. But U.S. Department of Education data show teacher salaries haveincreased steadily over the past 20 years, while student achievement hassteadily declined. This raises the question: If students are learning less,should teachers be getting paid more?

Like the rest of us, if teachers want higher salaries, they should earnthem. Don't get me wrong: Millions of talented teachers across the countryare "earning" those higher salaries through their skilled and dedicatedwork. But union rules prevent them from getting paid for it.

Unions have long insisted on uniform pay scales based almost exclusively ondegrees earned and years on the job. All the while, a teacher's mostimportant job--teaching--goes unmeasured and unrewarded. When a teacher who can't teach simple addition not only doesn't get fired but actually gets paid the same as the "Teacher of the Year," is it any wonder many of themost talented teachers are leaving the profession?

The AFT acknowledges this: "The traditional salary schedule does not reward additional skills and knowledge that benefit children ... does not respond to market forces ... nor does it provide incentives for teachers to assume differentiated roles." Yet it rejects merit-based pay, the one reform that would begin to address those shortcomings.

Pay for performance is not a new concept. It works for businessmen, lawyers, waitresses, travel agents, journalists, athletes, accountants, in fact, for most of us. Why not teachers? If a school faces a teacher shortage, let wages increase to attract them. Let schools compete to secure, retain andreward the best teachers. Let schools say "sayonara" to those unable orunwilling to get the job done.

Like any other profession, teaching contains individuals who are remarkablytalented and others who are remarkable only for their incompetence. Uniformpay protects the worst at the expense of the best. Why do union leaderssupport this? Simple self-interest. Merit-based pay would destroy the heartof the collective bargaining process. If every teacher negotiated his ownsalary, there would be less need for unions.

Under the status quo, teacher salaries bear little relation to studentperformance. For instance, at $48,304, the average teacher salary inWashington, D.C., tops 44 other states. Yet student achievement is among theworst in the nation. Such low achievement suggests there might be a few teachers in that lot who deserve no pay at all.

Of course there's more to student achievement than good teaching. Familybackground, student motivation, and natural ability all play a role. But atthe margins, teachers do make a difference. And many of us can rememberteachers who made a great difference. Skilled teachers can instill studentswith a desire to learn and inadequate teachers can snuff out the strongestdreams. Most of us have encountered both types of teachers along the way.

Opponents of merit-based pay say that measuring a teacher's value is adifficult task. True enough. There's no single definition of whatconstitutes a "good teacher." Non-public schools, however, evaluate teachers every day. Sometimes criteria include peer review, student testing, parent feedback, education levels, all or none of the above. Surely if schools can be trusted to educate children, a much more complex task, finding ways tograde teachers should be achievable.

One way to make merit-based pay work is to give parents choice over wheretheir kids go to school. Good schools with good teachers would attractstudents, and schools with poor teachers would have the incentive to make them shape up or ship out. But simply raising teacher pay withoutfundamental reform won’t give us better teachers--it'll just give us higherpay for good and bad teachers alike. Students deserve better.