Magazine article Times Educational Supplement

From the Editor - What a Performance about Merit-Based Pay: Opinion

Magazine article Times Educational Supplement

From the Editor - What a Performance about Merit-Based Pay: Opinion

Article excerpt

Performance-related pay is causing an almighty ruckus. The notion that people who perform well should be paid more is proving difficult for many in the profession to accept. Now the lawyers have weighed in, gloomily prophesying, like builders surveying a cracked wall, that there will be trouble ahead (pages 8-9). Who would have thought that lawyers would be so ready to point out the prospect of increased litigation?

Some of these fears are understandable; most are over-egged. None is sufficient to damn the practice. The objections boil down to 10:

1. You can't trust the headteacher to decide an individual's pay; they will always reward their favourites.

This is insulting and illogical. There will always be a few stupid heads but the vast majority are honest and self-aware enough to realise that, ultimately, they will pay the price if incompetence is rewarded and merit overlooked.

2. Heads lack sufficient information to know whom to reward.

If heads don't know who on their staff is performing well and who isn't, they really shouldn't be heads.

3. There is the potential for fraud.

There is always potential for fraud when people have control of budgets. That is not a reason to reject a policy. It is a reason to make sure that oversight is robust enough to detect fraudsters.

4. Performance-related pay is divisive.

Really? It's hard to see why paying good teachers extra is more divisive than paying people the same regardless of performance. Isn't that grossly unfair and doesn't it cause far more resentment?

5. It doesn't improve pupil outcomes. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.