The Teacher Merit Pay Mistake

Another state (Idaho) just folded in its attempt to legislate a process for "rewarding" excellent teachers. On Friday last the state senate voted to kill a teacher merit-pay bill championed by the elected state superintendent, and opposed by the teacher union. The local paper has called for the superintendent and the union to begin work on a plan for 2009 they both can agree to and will pass legislative muster.

While I support teacher merit pay, the problem is that it is the third leg of needed pay reforms, and the only one reformers are willing to address.

First and foremost we must admit that not all teaching jobs are alike, and thus do not have the same financial value. There is simply no justification for a $30,000 science teacher and a $50,000 physical education teacher in the same school - the difference being the age of the teachers.

Teachers who teach tested subjects that lead to a ranking of a state's schools should be on a higher pay scale from day one than those who teach the supporting subjects. This differentiating of pay into two strata - tested, and non-tested, would also serve to encourage the best and brightest teacher candidates to seek their degrees in the critical and higher paying subjects.

The second "leg" of needed pay reform is "overtime." It is a strange union indeed that allows its members to take 150 English themes, math exams, science labs, or history research papers home over the weekend and grade them without consideration of payment, while other teachers' subjects seldom if ever require homework or grading.

Setting aside a budget for "state tested subjects" that would cover reasonable grading overtime pay for those teachers would again differentiate the earnings of teachers in line with the value of their work.

Once we fix these two legs of teacher compensation we will indeed be ready to layer on a system of recognized merit reward for our best of the bunch...of those teachers who teach the most important (read "tested") subjects.