Until recently, merit pay for teachers was a debate about control. Those in favor (often business/economics types) argued that merit pay motivates teachers and improves achievement by "aligning incentives." Those opposed (including, notably, the teachers unions) argued that merit pay debases teachers by subjecting them further to uncaring administrators and biased tests.
Now there's a new wrinkle in the debate: Michelle Rhee, Teach for America alum and current chancellor of D.C. public schools, is proposing a voluntary merit pay system.
(Check out blog reactions at The Quick and the Ed and DC Teacher Chic. These, and most of the reactions I've seen online have been positive.) (Don't be surprised -- think about who blogs.)
I haven't sorted through the pros and cons of Rhee's proposal, so I can't tell you if it's good policy. But politically speaking, voluntary merit pay is a real innovation, because it breaks the status quo perception of merit pay as a power grab by district administrators. It's pretty hard to argue that a plan is about control when entry is voluntary.
2 comments:
Curious. The idea has real merit. I wonder how one accounts for the unseen cultural pressures that could come with a successful adoption of a voluntary merit pay system. "You know, if I don't sign up for voluntary merit," says the entry-level teacher, "all the other teachers will think it's because I know I'm no good."
This whole idea reminds me a bit of the Chinese two-tier market, with first a state subsidized production quota which, once met, allows producers to second capitalize on any extra above-quota production. So the question just whether you are a socialist or a capitalist teacher, but in favor of a Chinese mixed system.
Ben -
Two good points. Making the system voluntary turns it into a classic "signaling game." (Check wikipedia.) I'm working on writing up a description of signaling games for non-economists, because they have some fascinating implications for social policy.
The comparison to China is also interesting. I think you're right to classify China and the US education system together. They are the platypus and echidna of institutions -- hybrids that aren't traditional government hierarchies but aren't open markets, either. A proposal like Rhee's blurs the lines even further.
- Abe
Post a Comment