Merit Pay, History Repeated
The Human Resource Manager and Pay for Performance: Knowing First
Cindy Pilch-EDAD 5600
University of Wyoming
This paper will examine the history of pay for performance in education, the research on incentives and the pros and cons of using incentives. It will also explain how the accountability movement in education has resulted in increased pressure on HR personnel to incentivize teachers.
Over the last two centuries research shows varying degrees of initiation of merit pay. The 21st century has the pendulum swaying back toward the idea of finding a way to incent teachers for student achievement. Gratz ( 2005) discusses merit pay and performance pay being used synonymously and over a long period of time. The range of his study goes back to 1710 in England where children’s test scores in reading, writing and arithmetic determined a teacher’s salary. This practice continued in various forms through 1890, where after 30 years, the practice was determined to be unsound. By 1905 teachers were given autonomy in their teaching and were described as “assisting” students in their work. Merit pay in schools in 1928 had fallen to 18% and by the 1950’s it fell even further to 4%. This decline was due to increased student populations. The single salary schedule came to fruition in 1921 because the National Education Association (NEA) stipulated the measures used to evaluate merit pay were unreliable.
According to Gratz (2005) a small resurgence for merit pay began in the 1950’s because of Sputnik and a true commencement occurred during Nixon’s Presidency. In the 1960’s an experiment at Texarkana, AR in the use of merit pay was initiated due to the concern over the neglect of educational achievement in the urban poor. This resurgence was followed in the 1980’s by an endorsement by President Reagan of A Nation at Risk recommendation to promote competitive salaries that were market sensitive and based on teacher performance.
Cindy Pilch-EDAD 5600
University of Wyoming
This paper will examine the history of pay for performance in education, the research on incentives and the pros and cons of using incentives. It will also explain how the accountability movement in education has resulted in increased pressure on HR personnel to incentivize teachers.
Over the last two centuries research shows varying degrees of initiation of merit pay. The 21st century has the pendulum swaying back toward the idea of finding a way to incent teachers for student achievement. Gratz ( 2005) discusses merit pay and performance pay being used synonymously and over a long period of time. The range of his study goes back to 1710 in England where children’s test scores in reading, writing and arithmetic determined a teacher’s salary. This practice continued in various forms through 1890, where after 30 years, the practice was determined to be unsound. By 1905 teachers were given autonomy in their teaching and were described as “assisting” students in their work. Merit pay in schools in 1928 had fallen to 18% and by the 1950’s it fell even further to 4%. This decline was due to increased student populations. The single salary schedule came to fruition in 1921 because the National Education Association (NEA) stipulated the measures used to evaluate merit pay were unreliable.
According to Gratz (2005) a small resurgence for merit pay began in the 1950’s because of Sputnik and a true commencement occurred during Nixon’s Presidency. In the 1960’s an experiment at Texarkana, AR in the use of merit pay was initiated due to the concern over the neglect of educational achievement in the urban poor. This resurgence was followed in the 1980’s by an endorsement by President Reagan of A Nation at Risk recommendation to promote competitive salaries that were market sensitive and based on teacher performance.
References: Cavalluzzo, L. (2004). Is National Board Certification an Effective Signal of Teacher Quality? (IPR 11204) Chamberlin, R., Wragg, T. Haynes, G., & Wragg, C. (2002). Performance-related pay and the teaching profession: A review of the literature Ellis, T. (1984). Merit pay for teachers. Eric Digest . Gratz, D. (2005). Lessons from Denver: The pay for performance pilot. Phi Delta Kappan , 569-581. Kinnucan, H. (2006). State aid and student performance: A supply-demand analysis. Education Economics , 487-509. Klein, A. (2009). Budget would boost incentive pay, turnaround aid. Education Week . Lavy, V. (2007). Using performance -based pay to improve the quality of teachers. The Future of Children Podgursky, M. &. (2007). Credentials versus performance: Review of the teacher performance:Pay research Rebore, R. (2007). Human Resources Administration in Education. Boston: Pearson. Terry-Dollens, B. (2008). Paying for Results. The Board Foundation Education.