Michael Gove - wrong again: Performance-related pay in schools is crap

[noblegiraffe]

In new research that will surprise no teacher ever, performance-related pay has been shown to be ineffective in schools. It doesn’t raise school standards and it doesn’t improve staff retention.

We tried to tell Gove but would he listen? Can we get rid of it now?

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/performance-related-pay-ineffective-schools-study-finds

It raises pay though!

Wrong! Schools don’t have enough money to raise pay. A lot of teachers aren’t even getting the (below) cost-of-living non-performance related raise.

Mine does. I am not wrong! Teachers have had a performance related pay rise (except one) and the optional pay rise. Do get your facts right. Not all schools are the same. We have retained teachers and feel our performance related pay model works for us. Do not make the mistake of thinking everyone is as miserable as you, noble!

Performance related pay is absolutely the worst idea that ever came out of that weasels brain.

“Teachers’ pay is being cut as schools fail to award cost of living increases - as well as denying teachers pay progression, the National Education Union says.

One in five (21 per cent) teachers have been told they will not receive a cost-of-living pay rise from September this year, and a further 30 per cent are still waiting to hear, according to the union’s annual national pay survey.

The survey of more than 12,000 teachers found that, five years after the Government introduced performance related pay (PRP) for all teachers, 14 per cent of teachers eligible for pay progression on their pay scale were denied it this year and a further 25 per cent have not yet been told whether they will get a rise.

More than 90 per cent of those denied progression were not told during the year that they were not meeting the standards needed to progress, despite Government guidance that this should happen.

And although the vast majority (88 per cent) thought the decision to deny them progression was unfair, only one in five (22 per cent) are challenging the decision, with many saying that they have already been told not to bother appealing.

Although nearly a third (30 per cent) of those denied progression were told this was because they had not met pupil progress objectives, 17 per cent were told it was due to budgetary reasons, despite Government guidance that funding should not be a factor.”

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/one-five-teachers-denied-cost-living-pay-rise

Incidentally, every teacher knows that if a school wants to, they can deny a teacher pay progression based on ‘pupil progress objectives’ because they can set them to be as unmeetable as they like.

Incidentally, Bubbles, under the old system, those teachers in your school would have got a pay rise including the 1%. What has your school done that has raised pay beyond what they would have got?

noblegiraffe when you say "it doesn't work" that assumes that there was a clear purpose in the first place.

Clear and tangible alignment between performance and reward/remuneration is the right thing to do imo. Expecting performance related pay to be the panacea to cure all the education ills clearly is idiotic and I'm surprised anybody really thought it would in the first place.

It is impossible in teaching for there to be a clear and tangible alignment between performance and renumeration, which is why it was a stupid idea in the first place.

What a surprise finding. Did you know the Pope is catholic?

Firefox1066

Clear and tangible alignment between performance and reward/remuneration is the right thing to do imo

So why are teachers not being rewarded for the effort that they put it, I have clear records showing the amount of work that I have put in to various pupils (1-2-1, writing frames, exemplars, study sessions, phone-calls home and the all the rest) yet when these pupils fail to gain their fft (whatever) grades I will not be remunerated for my efforts.

So why should I be penalised for a pupil not putting in the effort?

What happens when you get to the top of the scale. I've been teaching 20+ years so I've been at UPS 3 for many years.
Each year we're told that our targets will affect us and they are really important blah blah blah but they only affect you when you're moving up the thresholds. I'm happy setting targets and find them useful in my teaching as a goal but attaching them to performance related pay doesn't work.

Luckily, my motivation comes from wanting the kids to do well and my own internal sense of satisfaction of doing well rather than financial incentives (although additional money always welcome).

Clear and tangible alignment between performance and reward/remuneration is the right thing to do imo.

Uh huh. Would that be clear and tangible alignment between reward/remuneration and the pupils' performance or the teacher's? Because let's not pretend they are the same thing.

14 % denied pay progression means that 86% did get pay progression and 1% on top of that. I agree the pay cap is not ideal but the idea that teachers do not use the appeal process is just ridiculous. Of course they do.

I see the vast majority of teachers getting higher grades and we give two salary points where it is warranted to reward excellent work. If the progression is justified we pay. Performance is not all about final grades of the children. A good policy is way more nuanced than that. It is certainly not used to reduce our budget. I think many schools do operate PM fairly.

What the research actually shows is how poor some school leadership is at performance management. Also how poorly some teachers engage in it and continue to misunderstand the purpose of it. It is clearly not the only tool to raise standards in schools. It never was and never could be.

Most professions have performance management. It is an important tool for self improvement and identifying training needs. It is very sad that some teachers cannot engage in a process that nearly every other professional sees as normal. I guess it’s why sime teachers are not viewed as respected professionals in some quarters.

14 % denied pay progression means that 86% did get pay progression

No it doesn’t. There’s another option “was told not to bother to apply for pay progression” and I’ve heard of that being used.

Most professions have performance management. It is an important tool for self improvement and identifying training needs. It is very sad that some teachers cannot engage in a process that nearly other professional sees as normal

Er, teachers have always had performance management. No one has any problem with performance management. Your sad face can be packed away.

I did laugh at identifying training needs though. No money to send teachers on courses any more.

Noblegiraffe, performance management in schools came into being in 2001, not sure whether you call that always!
I do have to agree with Bubbles that all teachers should be performance managed. There are multitude of ways of this being assessed and PM based solely on the results of the pupils is clearly just wrong. Such situations just show the paucity of management to instigate sensible and effective PM targets.
Far more important as a parameter for performance is whether the pupils are learning well from the teaching that is being carried out. That can be quite difficult when far too many teachers think nobody should be allowed in their classroom to observe their teaching and whether the pupils are learning. I am amazed at some of the schools I go into at the way the head teacher is not "allowed" into classrooms without it being agreed. That is just bizarre and would never be tolerated in other professions, where CPD and mentoring is seen as the first requisite of improvement.

Performance Related Pay does not work
full stop
my old accountancy firm tried it for a few years and it was a disaster

and reliance on bonuses and appraisals by bosses is a significant factor in this story
www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/06/flood-gender-pay-data-puts-some-companies-defensive-female-workers-dismay

admission
There is a significant difference between performance management and PRP
one is basic good business sense
the other creates discord and favouritism and misaligned motivation factors between employees.

In other news, bears sh*t in the woods!

Noblegiraffe, performance management in schools came into being in 2001, not sure whether you call that always! and Appraisals were in existence long before that - what's your point ?

It's also been attribute d to a partial explanation of the gender pay gap, which as you know I am obsessed with this week!

Must add, though, we don't have it at my school. Hoorah.

Our school uses performance related pay and yes, it is effective. SATS results (or other hard measures) are only a tiny fraction of what we use to measure performance. Teachers are expected to set their own goals, with input from management. Things like successfully running a theme week, getting in outside speakers and events for that week (e.g. Science/arts week), or implementing a new skill with other teachers etc. The only target they don’t get a say in is progress of PP and other disadvantaged groups - that’s always on their performance appraisal, but the progress target is set with their input. It’s not like SLT turn around and say, right, all your kids need to be doing x,y and z.

jaffacake
That all sounds nice and fluffy ....but

How do you reward all of the members of a team fairly for work that one loud person takes credit for?

How do you protect against the SLT member and the teacher not getting on so having different perceptions of "success" ?

How do you handle the impact of staff turnover on team performance ?

Because all of the evidence shows that those soft measuring points result in rewarding people like me and thus entrenching gender and race differences in promotion and pay.

Hence why PRP is well and truly out of favour in parts of the private sector.

We have some of the highest results in the country without it...

would not those staff do those things without PRP ??

Also, who checks that one person's target doesn't negatively impact upon the workload of others? This can happen in my school even without pay linked to appraisal targets and I can only imagine it is more the case where it is a PRP culture!