DOCSLIB.ORG

The Merit of Merit Pay

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Lindenwood University Digital Commons@Lindenwood University Dissertations Theses & Dissertations Spring 5-2011 The Merit of Merit Pay Melissa May Pemberton Albright Lindenwood University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lindenwood.edu/dissertations Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons Recommended Citation Pemberton Albright, Melissa May, "The Merit of Merit Pay" (2011). Dissertations. 568. https://digitalcommons.lindenwood.edu/dissertations/568 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses & Dissertations at Digital Commons@Lindenwood University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Lindenwood University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Merit of Merit Pay by Melissa May Pemberton Albright May 2011 A Dissertation submitted to the Education Faculty of Lindenwood University in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Education School of Education The Merit of Merit Pay by Melissa May Pemberton Albright This Dissertation has been approved as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education Lindenwood University, School of Education Declaration of Originality I do hereby declare and attest to the fact that this is an original study based solely upon my own scholarly work at Lindenwood University and that I have not submitted it for any other college or university course or degree. Full Legal Name: Your Full Name as it appears in University Records Acknowledgements This dream of mine could not have been achieved without the help, support, and encouragement of many people. I would like to thank my dissertation committee: Dr. Jason Anderson, Dr. Sherry DeVore, and Dr. Terry Reid. The committee was instrumental in assisting me with the writing of my dissertation. Dr. Anderson always had words of encouragement through the pursuit of my doctorate and was always willing to listen. Dr. DeVore provided me the confidence to write like a scholar, and Dr. Galland took me under her wing in the final stages of writing of my dissertation to make it the best it could be. Last but not least, Dr. Reid always made sure my paper work was turned in and complete. I would like to thank the educators of Missouri who participated in my research study and for taking the time to complete my surveys. Without you, this study could not have been completed. I would like to thank the 10 education leaders around the state for taking the time to talk with me about the issues facing educators today. It was a pleasure getting to know so many people who truly want the best for our students. I would like to thank my husband, Garret, and my two boys, Tyson and Tyler, for allowing me to sacrifice time with them to reach a goal I set for myself many years ago. You have patiently watched me type for hours at a time, fixed your own meals, and missed time with me. I would like to thank my parents, Carol and Richard Pemberton, for their love, support, and encouragement as I faced challenges along the way. I am eternally grateful to all who supported me through this endeavor. Without each and every one of you, this dream would not have been possible. ii Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of Missouri educators and state education leaders toward merit pay. In addition, a secondary purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of educators on the impact of merit pay on recruiting and retaining highly-qualified teachers. Due to the current economic situation, districts are looking at ways to compensate teachers while recruiting and retaining highly-qualified teachers. Districts must continue to meet federal and state mandates to increase student achievement, and researchers have identified teacher quality as one such influence. Therefore, many believe the traditional salary schedule, which has been the predominate method of paying teachers for many years, is outdated and ineffective. In this study, the history of the traditional salary schedule, successful and unsuccessful merit pay programs, legislation, and alternatives to merit pay were examined. Utilizing a mixed- methods design, 219 surveys and 10 interviews were conducted. The survey return rate was 22% resulting from distributions of the surveys at the fall conferences of the MNEA and the MSTA. Additional surveys were distributed in two schools. A t-test was conducted to determine if perceptions of tenured and non-tenured teachers were different. The results of the surveys indicated Missouri educators and two educational organizations are overwhelmingly opposed to merit pay. Interviews revealed state education leaders are divided in their support of merit pay. The study disclosed a desire for all educators to be at the table as compensation plans are discussed, allowing for all parties to be involved in the decision process. iii Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures .................................................................................................................... ix Chapter One: Introduction ..................................................................................................1 Background ..............................................................................................................1 Theoretical Frameworks ..........................................................................................4 Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................6 Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................8 Research Questions ..................................................................................................9 Significance of the Study ........................................................................................9 Limitations of the Study.........................................................................................10 Assumptions ...........................................................................................................11 Definition of Key Terms ........................................................................................11 Summary ................................................................................................................12 Chapter Two: Review of Literature ...................................................................................14 Historical Perspective ............................................................................................14 Theoretical Frameworks ........................................................................................18 Traditional Salary Schedule ...................................................................................21 Opponents of Merit Pay .........................................................................................23 Proponents of Merit Pay ........................................................................................28 Unsuccessful Pay Programs ...................................................................................33 Governor’s Educator Excellence Grants in Texas .....................................33 Project on Incentives in Teaching in Nashville, Tennessee .......................34 iv Results of Unsuccessful Programs .............................................................35 Successful Pay Programs .......................................................................................36 ASPIRE in Houston, Texas........................................................................36 ProComp in Denver, Colorado ..................................................................37 Results of Successful Programs .................................................................38 Legislation..............................................................................................................39 Alternatives to Merit Pay .......................................................................................43 Minimum Starting Salary and Added Responsibilities ..............................44 National Board Certification ......................................................................45 Quality of Teaching ...................................................................................45 Tiered Programs .........................................................................................46 Value-Added Models .................................................................................47 Multiple Measures .....................................................................................51 Accomplished Teaching Pathways ............................................................52 Summary ................................................................................................................54 Chapter Three: Methodology .............................................................................................56 Research Questions ................................................................................................57 Population and Sample ..........................................................................................58
Recommended publications
  • Performance-Based Pay in the Federal Government

    Performance-Based Pay in the Federal Government

    Performance- Based Pay in the Federal Government Steve Nelson Prepared for Performance Incentives: Their Growing Impact on American K-12 Education in Nashville,Tennessee on February 28, 2008 Working Paper 2008-05 February 2008 LED BY IN COOPERATION WITH: The NaTioNal CeNTer oN PerformaNCe iNCeNTives (NCPI) is charged by the federal government with exercising leader- ship on performance incentives in education. Established in 2006 through a major research and development grant from the United States Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES), NCPI conducts scientific, comprehensive, and independent studies on the individual and institutional effects of performance in- centives in education. A signature activity of the center is the conduct of two randomized field trials offering student achievement-related bonuses to teachers. e Center is committed to air and rigorous research in an effort to provide the field of education with reliable knowledge to guide policy and practice. e Center is housed in the Learning Sciences Institute on the campus of Vanderbilt University’s Peabody College. e Center’s management under the Learning Sciences Institute, along with the National Center on School Choice, makes Vanderbilt the only higher education institution to house two federal research and development centers supported by the Institute of Education Services. is working paper was supported by the National Center on Perform- ance Incentives, which is funded by the United States Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences (R30SA06034). is is a dra version of a paper that will be presented at a national conference, Performance Incentives; Their Growing Impact on American K-12 Education, in Nashville, Tennessee on February 28-29, 2008.
  • Merit Pay for Florida Teachers: Design and Implementation Issues

    Merit Pay for Florida Teachers: Design and Implementation Issues

    WORKING P A P E R Merit Pay for Florida Teachers Design and Implementation Issues RICHARD BUDDIN, DANIEL F. MCCAFFREY, SHEILA NATARAJ KIRBY, AND NAILING XIA WR-508-FEA August 2007 Prepared for the Florida Education Association This product is part of the RAND Education working paper series. RAND working papers are intended to share researchers’ latest findings and to solicit additional peer review. This paper has been peer reviewed but not edited. Unless otherwise indicated, working papers can be quoted and cited without permission of the author, provided the source is clearly referred to as a working paper. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. is a registered trademark. Abstract Florida has enacted a plan to reward teachers based on their classroom performance, as measured on standardized student achievement tests and principal evaluations. This merit pay initiative is designed to provide a financial incentive for teachers to improve student outcomes, to encourage the retention of proficient teachers, and to attract high‐ skilled individuals to the teaching profession. The design and implementation of merit pay faces several key challenges. First, student outcomes are difficult to define and measure. Second, the contributions of individual teachers to student outcomes are difficult to disentangle from student background and prior achievement. The analysis shows serious deficiencies in several measures of teacher performance. Policy makers should be wary of adapting any measure without careful analysis of its properties and a plan to monitor how it is performing. The key issue is whether the incentive and sorting effects of an admittedly imperfect merit pay system can improve the quality of the teacher workforce.
  • BACKGROUNDER No

    BACKGROUNDER No

    BACKGROUNDER No. 3357 | DECEMBER 10, 2018 Reforming the Federal Bureaucracy: Challenge and Opportunity Donald J. Devine, PhD Abstract The federal bureaucracy is not meeting its own performance-based civil Key Points service ideals, and the problem is greater than bureaucratic adminis- tration. The federal bureaucracy’s inefficiency, expense, and irrespon- n The federal bureaucracy is failing siveness to political leadership are rooted in the Progressive belief that to meet its own performance- unelected experts should be trusted with promoting the general welfare based civil service ideals. Ability, knowledge, and skills are no longer in just about every area of social life. If political interests continue to the basis for recruitment, selec- force Congress and the President to act directly on all manner of soci- tion, or advancement, while pay etal problems, the federal bureaucracy will continue to be overwhelmed. and benefits for comparable work Unlimited utopian Progressive aspirations cannot be squared with con- are substantially above those in the stitutional government. Reform must address both the merit system’s private sector. failures and the Progressive vision of government that has created an n Retention is not based primarily overweening bureaucracy unable to meet its own ideals. on performance, and inadequate performance is largely neither cor- t the very pinnacle of the modern Progressive program to make rected nor punished. Agovernment competent stands the ideal of a professionalized, n The federal bureaucracy’s inef- career civil service. Since the turn of the 20th century, Progressives ficiency, expense, and irrespon- have sought a system that could effectively select, train, reward, and siveness to political leadership are guard from partisan influence the neutral scientific experts they rooted in the Progressive belief believe are required to staff the national government and run the that unelected experts should be administrative state.
  • MERIT PAY in PUBLIC EDUCATION by Sergio G

    MERIT PAY in PUBLIC EDUCATION by Sergio G

    1 MERIT PAY IN PUBLIC EDUCATION By Sergio G. Flores In this view, the data show that many, mostly suburban, U.S. schools work well, arguably among the best in the world. Instead of blaming the overall structure of U.S. schools, we should focus attention on inner cities, which need not only better schools but also improved health care, jobs, and safe neighborhoods. From the Data Game, Controversies in Social Science Statistics, 19991 WHAT IS MERIT PAY OR PAYMENT FOR PERFROMANCE? For the way merit pay in education is mentioned all over the media, it would seem that everybody knew for certain what it is and what it does --It is as if merit pay were common knowledge. On the surface merit pay is a simple concept: it is extra money awarded for achieving predetermined results, scores, or goals. After all, president Obama, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, Governors from California and Romney Massachusetts among others, NY Major Bloomberg , and education chancellors Michelle Rhee in Washington D. C. and Joel Klein, from New York City, among others have mentioned regularly it on their speeches. However, asking what good merit pay is going to do for public education may bring up a variety of wishful thinking and hopes, rather than straightforward answers. To this day, neither president Obama or anyone in his administration has explained in a comprehensive manner what merit pay means, does, or pretends to accomplish --Does he mean that a few teachers –math and English teachers, mostly, will be paid more because their students had higher scores?
  • You Get What You Pay For: Why We Need to Invest in Strategic Compensation Reform Matthew G. Springer1 University of North Carol

    You Get What You Pay For: Why We Need to Invest in Strategic Compensation Reform Matthew G. Springer1 University of North Carol

    You Get What You Pay For: Why We Need to Invest in Strategic Compensation Reform Matthew G. Springer1 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill August 2019 1 Matthew G. Springer is the Robena and Walter E. Hussman, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Education Reform at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. I greatly appreciate helpful comments and suggestions from Eric Houck, Matt Kraft, Jim Guthrie, Lam Pham, and Luis Rodriguez as well as course participants in Carolina’s Accountability and Incentives Ph.D. seminar and the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching’s roundtable on the future of public education. The usual disclaimers apply. Contact information: [email protected]. 1 Abstract This article draws on recent insight regarding the distribution and mobility of highly effective teachers, student access to top-performing educators, and research on the effectiveness of strategic compensation reforms to argue that the single salary pay schedule has resulted in disturbing inequities for students and inefficiencies in resource allocation. These inequities are particularly alarming given that strategic compensation reforms hold promise for not only improving the quality of public education overall, but ensuring quality educational opportunities for students from traditionally underserved communities. Simply put, strategic compensation reform can meaningfully impact public education, and it is time this potential is recognized and utilized. 2 Introduction Teacher compensation reform is an increasingly common strategy to enhance academic outcomes in the United States public elementary and secondary school system. School districts, state education agencies, and national and federal initiatives currently fund the development and implementation of programs that compensate teachers based on their performance and/or differentiate teacher pay in response to market conditions.
  • Rethinking Teacher Compensation Policies: Why Now, Why Again?

    Rethinking Teacher Compensation Policies: Why Now, Why Again?

    11706-01_CH01_rev.qxd 7/20/09 11:01 PM Page 1 1 Rethinking Teacher Compensation Policies: Why Now, Why Again? Matthew G. Springer n recent years, teacher compensation reform has resurfaced as a strategy to Ienhance academic outcomes in the U.S. public elementary and secondary school system. A number of school districts, state education agencies, and national and federal initiatives presently fund the development and implementation of pro- grams that remunerate teachers based on their performance or differentiate teacher pay in response to market conditions. These programs are predicated on the argu- ment that prevailing compensation practices provide weak incentives for teachers to act in the best interest of their students and that inefficiencies arise from rigidi- ties in current compensation policies. Financial incentives also have been advocated as a viable tool for motivating teachers to higher levels of performance, enticing more effective teachers to join or remain in the teaching profession, and aligning teacher behaviors and interests with institutional goals. Nonetheless, a sturdy and influential base of individuals and organizations remains fundamentally opposed to modifying the single salary schedule.1 Opponents cite little evidence that pay-for-performance programs make schools better and further note that these programs render schools less effec- tive by crowding out intrinsic rewards; they also say that the education system lacks appropriate measures for evaluating teacher performance. 1 11706-01_CH01_rev.qxd 7/20/09 11:01 PM Page 2 2 matthew g. springer Efforts to reconceptualize teacher compensation practices have garnered steady, if not increased, attention since the early- to mid-1980s, as illustrated in figure 1-1.2 The notable spike in 1983 coincides with release of the influential A Nation at Risk report and then-president Ronald Reagan’s proclamation that “teachers should be paid and promoted on the basis of their merit and compe- tence.