Education Secretary Arne Duncan proposes judging teachers on student performance. Well, yeah, but how will we measure that performance? By comparing test scores with those of students from other nations? Through an arbitrary process of standardized testing without common, national standards?
Currently, teachers’ salaries are based on three things: The local school district’s ability/willingness to pay; the teacher’s years of experience, and the amount of education beyond the bachelors or masters level. These are easily measured, do not depend on subjectivity, and provide a hierarchy of salary that the teacher herself can positively affect. There is no state or national standard for teachers’ salaries, and the wide variation in earning potential is dependent on the state and local funding formula and sources for a given district. This usually translates into higher salaries for teachers in more affluent areas, and lower salaries in less affluent areas.
Teachers in more affluent areas often enjoy the fruits of their community’s affluence in the classroom in the form of better prepared students, fewer disruptions due to student behavior or absenteeism, greater availability of resources, participation by parents who are highly educated, and higher quality of facilities. In less affluent areas, teachers often struggle against the poor preparedness of their students due to lack of enrichment, high absenteeism, disruptions of students who may place a lower value on the educational process, distractions due to high crime rates, shortages of personnel and materials, and lack of parental support due to absent or poorly-educated parents. Their school buildings are older, many are obsolete, with poor ventilation, ineffective heating systems, no air conditioning, antiquated lighting, electrical systems that will not support the requirements of modern technology, even inoperative plumbing.
This disparity in resources can be seen quite clearly when we examine the achievement gap between affluent schools and financially struggling schools. Is the reason for the disparity the difference in teacher salary? No, indeed, teacher salary is just one indicator of the inequity of the distribution of resources.
So, Mr. Duncan, how do you propose to ameliorate these inequities through merit pay? First of all, do you think teachers in lower-achieving schools just aren’t trying hard enough? If you just promise them that they will make more money, they’ll work harder to overcome the obstacles faced by students living in poverty?
The implication that teachers lack incentive to inspire students to achieve, and that by paying them more if their students achieve we can overcome the shortcommings of the American educational system, is insulting and absurd. Doctors do not get paid more if their patients recover and less if they remain ill or die. Neither teachers nor doctors strive harder for the promise of higher pay. Both professions have a higher calling.
Mr. Duncan, let’s make your salary dependent on factors beyond your control. Since NCLB requires ALL students to be proficient in math and reading by 2014, let’s challenge you to provide 100% equal funding, facilities, and resources for ALL schools.
