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