Merit pay for teachers is a hot button issue that seems to make so much sense until one asks: Upon what criteria would this merit pay be earned?
Well, that's simple...the better teachers teach, the more they make.
But what makes a "better teacher"? The teacher who works hardest? Puts in the most hours? For the many teachers who are already working long before the day officially starts and don't stop until late into the evening - including weekends, plus summers - it is a bit difficult to ask how much harder and longer one can be humanly expected to work.
Teachers, just like other people, also have homes to manage, families to raise and, God-forbid, lives to live.
Perhaps test scores can determine the best teachers. That seems easy to many...except for teachers who don't have standardized tests, so we exclude teachers who teach music, art, physical education, technology education, pre-school, kindergarten, speech, drama, debate, foreign language.
And upon what test scores should we award merit pay? High scores? Do we exclude teachers who teach students with special-needs, mentally handicapped students, below-grade-level students, foreign language-speaking students?
Perhaps we award merit pay for teachers based upon increased test scores or value added. But that is still highly debated by educators throughout the country and does not have an easy answer to it.
Grade-point averages of students? No one thinks GPAs say much about a student (except colleges which still make this a determining factor for entrance). Obviously, that would eliminate early childhood and most elementary teachers.
Does the Advanced Placement teacher deserve more because his students made good scores on their exams even though he probably has the "better" academic students? Does he deserve more than the kindergarten teacher who prepares the students for future academic success? What about the teacher who helps the child read for the first time? Who is best?
In another sense we have put the cart before the horse by even beginning with merit pay before we address living wage pay.
This argument was singled out by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which asserts that merit pay cannot even be addressed until teachers are earning a "competitive living wage." Most (non-politician) business-economists suggest we pay entry-level Oklahoma teachers $40,000 a year. Considering that entry-level Tulsa teachers currently make $32,900, discussion of merit pay is still many Legislatures and governors in the future.
Even more fundamentally, most teachers became teachers because they wanted to make a difference in the lives of students. They are collaborative in nature, not competitive. They want to work with their peers, not compete against them. They teach because they love it - in spite of the less-than-respectful pay.
But, that doesn't make the less-than-respectful pay "right."
No teacher became a teacher to get rich, but that does not mean they should be paid so little that they must work two or three extra jobs so that their children can attend college. Teachers teach because they want to make a difference in the lives of our greatest resource, our children.
So please don't spout merit pay like it is going to do anything to improve education. It has been tried across the country ... and it has proven to be unsuccessful because no district has discovered a fair, affordable and objective way to make it work.
The best teachers are those who - with the proper support, materials and facilities - ignite the spark of love of learning in the lives of their students. Until there is a test to measure that, merit pay for teachers makes as much sense as merit pay for doctors, first responders and missionaries.
Lynn Stockley is president of the Tulsa Classroom Teachers Association.
Original Print Headline: Teacher merit pay makes no sense
Reader Forum
The incarceration rate in Oklahoma is among the highest in the nation with approximately 26,000 people behind bars at any given time.
The Nov. 28, 2008, Tulsa World published my Readers Forum piece, "Antietam," in which I reported on a visit my then-8-year-old grandson, Stevie, and I made to Antietam battlefield in rural Maryland.
