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

Um, are you comparing a human child to an engineering project? Because it seems like you are, but that would be incredibly stupid.

What is the definition of a good teacher?
Here are two examples, based (loosely!!!) on staff in my school. You tell me who ‘deserves’ the higher pay!
Teacher A - early twenties male, very good looking so popular with all the teenage girls (constant knocks on the staff room door ‘is Mr Bloggs here?’), plays lots of sport so popular with lots of teenage boys, naturally witty and easy to talk to. Everyone says he is a fantastic teacher. Creates some resources which he shares, but they are full of mistakes and not easy to use by other staff. Marks books but is a bit slapdash in this regard. Is ambitious and confident and is completely happy going to the HT asking for more money as he has seen jobs elsewhere and might just apply for them ... gets good exam results as the pupils love him so much they work hard in his subject.
Teacher B - female, early thirties, arrives at school every day at 7.30 and doesn’t leave till 6pm, follows all school policies to the letter, marking is exemplary, creates a huge amount of brilliant resources which are regularly used by everyone else. Writes SOL, updates assessments each year etc. Is slightly socially awkward, pupils don’t naturally warm to her, but she works unbelievably hard. Spends evenings doing school work or reading the latest educational research.
Who gets paid more?
Who deserves more money?
The whole pay situation in schools is a disgrace, in my opinion, deeply unfair, very much weighted to male staff, (is it possible to do a freedom of information request to find out the gender pay gap in a school?!?!?) completely open to abuse, either deliberatel or not, very divisive, and should, in my opinion never have been introduced into schools.

Having been both an engineer and now a teacher, carol, I categorically disagree that assessing teachers is no harder than assessing engineers. The outcomes of any engineering project are easily measurable, but children's progress is not. I would not want to send my child to a school where only the "measurable" progress was valued.

The whole idea of PRP seems to be 'businesses do it, so should schools' without any recognition that the two are completely different environments.

gluesticks Outputs of engineering projects are easily measurable, but outcomes in teaching are also easily measurable.
What is harder, in both cases, is the inputs and external factors which are not in control of the employee.
It is doable if people want to, with the same measure of accuracy.
Teachers are brought up on payscales, which are totally wrong and need to be removed.

The truth is PRP is not enough of a factor in teaching - the gaps/benefits need to be larger.

”I was not, and never have been, interested in being on SLT.....PRP, for me, was pointless as there was literally nowhere to go”

But ultimately the same problem exist in all sectors, in all industries. That’s not unique to teaching. There’s always going to be a limit to pay progression for those who (whether by choice or not) stay doing the same job for years rather than taking promotion. There has to be, both for affordability and also to ensure higher levels of responsibility and accountability are fairly reflected.

Where this issue becomes more specific to teaching is that there is clearly more of a retention problem than elsewhere. But my personal opinion is that retention would be vastly and more effectively improved by addressing several other factors about the job rather than raising UPS3 a bit. Or by removing PRP.

outcomes in teaching are also easily measurable.

Oh go on then. How do you measure them?

*”What criteria do you use to judge teacher performance?”

As I’ve said further up the thread, I don’t. I rely on the EHT and Heads of School to do that as they have the requisite knowledge, experience and direct contact with the teachers. Judging individual teachers’ performance is nowhere near being my job.*

But as Director of the MAT and head of the pay review committee, you surely know what criteria are being used to assess teachers with. Who sets the pay and conditions of service in the MAT?

Outputs of engineering projects are easily measurable, but outcomes in teaching are also easily measurable.
What is harder, in both cases, is the inputs and external factors which are not in control of the employee.

I would also like to know how you measure the output. And how you would account for external factors with children, when a lot of the time the school isn't even aware that they exist?

But ultimately the same problem exist in all sectors, in all industries. That’s not unique to teaching. There’s always going to be a limit to pay progression for those who (whether by choice or not) stay doing the same job for years rather than taking promotion.

Actually I disagree. DH works for a management consultancy. In his company there are 4 levels before partner, but in each, employees can continue to get pay rises, based on specific criteria, and get bonuses, every year, for as long as they stay at that level. I reached the top of my earning potential aged 32! There’s no financial reward for classroom practitioners who want to be really good at what they do. Let’s face it, if everyone who gets to UPS3 wanted to move up to SLT, there would be a problem - nowhere near enough jobs to go round. That’s where other industries have a more sensible structure - in DH’s company, the number of partners is limited and therefore they have to incentivise people to remain in the lower grades. Saying it was my choice not to seek promotion is daft.

flowery

See my last post. I don’t define it.

Because you can't or won't?

But I trust those who do in our schools. And I’m very confident that they take into account a wide range of factors when they make their pay recommendations

They take in to account only the targets that have been set.

caroldecker

There are major differences between engineering and teaching

Not to mention that you have defined specifications as to the required outcomes.

I have no ideological objection to performance related pay ( I worked in the civil service in the 1990's when it was introduced there ) but only if SOMEONE can come up with criteria by which teachers can be FAIRLY judged against.
Any ideas? Most criteria I have seen used have been, to a greater or lesser degree, flawed in that they are too reliant upon factors over which teachers have little control-the children they teach!

”Because you can't or won't?”

Both! I don’t have anything like enough knowledge to do it, and would be way overstepping my role to try. I’m a volunteer director, and my job is to set direction provide support and hold the SLT to account, not to performance manage their staff and give my uninformed opinions about how individual staff are performing!

”Saying it was my choice not to seek promotion is daft.”

You said that, not me!

Thank you for that specific example of people who can get paid more and more indefinitely, but it stands to reason that in the vast majority of jobs, you can’t stay in them forever and keep getting increases in pay ( other than possibly inflationary increases when/if these may happen). Otherwise good administrators could get paid more than company directors just by doing the same job well for 20 years. Not hitting the top in the same job until 32 doesn’t seem outrageous to me. No way of doing that in my profession! I had to seek promotion quickly to get progression. Which I was fine with, fortunately!

I’m not saying teachers aren’t underpaid in general for what they do, but the lack of additional scope for increased pay without taking on additional responsibility is perfectly normal.

But what it does do is encourage good teachers to apply for promotion (which may not fit their skill set) and teach less. This doesn’t make sense. If you want to retain good teachers, you need to make provision for them to stay in the classroom.

I think that EvilTwins meant he/she had reached the top of the pay scale by the time s/he was 32 so has 30 more years at the same pay! So the only way a good teacher can earn more is to stop teaching!

Yes, TAs have a performance related component to their salary progression.

Hahahahahahaha best joke I've heard all year.

But what it does do is encourage good teachers to apply for promotion (which may not fit their skill set) and teach less

I struggle to think of a role where that is not true. In most jobs good people eventually have to move into management if they want to earn more. In some jobs it is possible for high performing non-managers to earn as much as junior managers or even, in some circumstances, middle managers. But it is rare for a non-manager to earn as much as a senior manager. After all, the senior manager has a much higher level of accountability and should be planning further ahead.

But we have a shortage of teachers, shouldn't the pay system be rewarding those that want to remain as teachers, rather than encouraging them to leave?

”I think that EvilTwins meant he/she had reached the top of the pay scale by the time s/he was 32 so has 30 more years at the same pay! So the only way a good teacher can earn more is to stop teaching!”

Yes I understood what he/she was saying. And as with virtually all professions, the only way of earning more is to move into management. Making it to 32 getting regular pay rises without having to make that move is hitting the ceiling much later than others do. Certainly not an option in my profession. I became an HR Manager at 28, which I wanted to do in terms of taking on more responsibility but there’s no doubt I couldn’t have achieved higher pay without doing it. No, that’s a lie actually, I could have achieved higher pay with a sideways move into another sector, but only temporarily, then I would have hit the same problem very shortly afterwards.

There’s no shame in not wanting to move away from the actual job and into management, but it’s not realistic to expect not to hit a ceiling pay-wise if that’s what you do, and not hitting it earlier than 32 isn’t bad going imo.

There are plenty of things wrong with teachers’ financial remuneration and other working conditions, clearly. But I don’t think this particular issue is one of them, because it applies universally.

*”But we have a shortage of teachers, shouldn't the pay system be rewarding those that want to remain as teachers, rather than encouraging them to leave?”

How would you suggest that happens? As I’ve said above, my own point of view is that paying more isn’t the key to retaining good teachers, even if the money to do it suddenly appeared. I think there are more fundamental problems with things like workload and the whole system, and I think resolving those would go far more to resolving a retention crisis than bunging some more money at teachers.

But as I said, I’m not a teacher so maybe I’m wrong.

think that EvilTwins meant he/she had reached the top of the pay scale by the time s/he was 32 so has 30 more years at the same pay! So the only way a good teacher can earn more is to stop teaching!

This is exactly what I meant. I was HOD and on UPS3 by 32 and therefore had no further options for promotion other than SLT.

My point is that unless there is some incentive to remain a classroom teacher, or at “middle” management level, people like me will get to a certain point then leave. Between 2010 & 2017, in real terms, I had a pay cut every year.

Good SLT members are in short supply too! If decent people don't do it, you have rubbish PRP schemes. It is in your hands! So make a difference! Who expects to sit in a job for years and years and get big pay incentives?

It is a joke to think that people running a multi million ££££ consultancy company have it easy when looking at PRP in comparison to teachers. Its the old adage coming to the fore here again: If you can do X, do it, if you cannot, teach. (And complain about it forever more). It also clearly shows no understanding of engineering consultancy either. Hopefully no careers advice is given out regarding engineering. Thankfully its better paid than teaching!

So SOMEONE give me some examples of performance management targets for teachers that are fair, impartial, not reliant on external factors and identify good teaching rather than pen pushing!