Teacher Attitude Towards Performance Incentives in Georgia - Dissertation Example

?Running head: PAY FOR PERFORMANCE INCENTIVES Research on Teacher Attitude Towards Performance Incentives in Georgia Course Title: Course Number: Date Due: Review The fact that teacher contributes a lot towards the learning of students and the results that they bring is widely recognized around the globe. The effectiveness of the teachers has a greater influence on the learning of students, than any other factors affecting the student learning in the control of schools in the world that include the size of the school, the size of the class, and the effectiveness of “after-school programs” (Bacharach & David 2009). There have been concerns on Georgia about the contribution of teachers towards the studying of students and the quality of the teacher workforce and there have been calls to reform the compensation of teachers. The survey result would be an indication of how the teacher attitudes differ by personal characteristics such as subject area, school assignment, or experience as well as the teacher workforce that include the school performance and the level of trust among teachers and principals. There have been calls by policymakers, analysts, and education advocates that the criterion used on teacher compensation is inappropriate and therefore it has been criticized as being too uniform and rigid. Critics claim that the present system in Georgia is not efficient as it concentrates on the experience of teachers and the qualifications they hold alone and this makes the teaching profession unattractive to result oriented people who might be having technical skills (Michael, 2007). Moreover, the critics of this compensation system for teachers argue that the present system does not do much in regard to motivate and reward effective teachers. Therefore instead of the uniform pay of teachers that goes ahead to ignore the labor market realities, reformers argue that they have provided the teachers with a varied incentive. However, despite the reformers claiming of the different incentives to teachers, this does not have any effect on the teacher motivation. The incentives have given too little as compared to the teaching assignments (Ballou, 2009). The Problem in Question According to a US study, there has been the comparison of the effectiveness of rewarding a select group of teachers against all the teachers in the school (Baugh, 2009). An analysis of the National Education Longitudinal Study, the US Department of Education's School, and the data from the Staffing Survey on performance pay came up with a conclusion that rewarding a select group of teachers was effective in student learning as compared to the whole school (Brodie & Ron 2008). However, several recent studies reveal that rewarding of the entire group of teachers in the whole school have a positive affect on the test scores of students. In addition, the research shows that through rewarding the teachers uniformly the teachers have an opportunity and encouraged to cooperate with the other teachers in the school by sharing their experiences. Critics of the selected pay program believe that the whole-school performance pay system are more acceptable to the teachers and less “controversial” (Donald & James, 2010). Regarding this, evidence of the problem that calls for farther research on the problem before policy recommendations are made. The purpose of this study is to find out why the teachers have different views regarding the pay for performance initiative. Definitions In this section, the definition of performance pay is dealt within general to set up a context on how it applies to the teachers specifically in Georgia. Therefore the key word in this paper is pay for performance in Georgia. This is the plan to have a direct relationship between the employee pay and the output of the employee. The pay for performance plan often considers of a select group of persons or the whole group of people. This plan is in line with the mostly held belief in humans that employee need to be rewarded depending on their effort in the delivery of service and other beliefs of human motivation which assert that an employee is motivated by looking at the relationship between their performance and their pay (Barbara, 2009). Another term in this paper is the performance. This can be applied to both the pupil and the teachers. It is an achievement in the teaching and learning process (Burke, 2008). In this paper, the performance of a teacher is based on the pay they receive that motivates them something that has been lacking in the county of Georgia. In addition, a pupil's performance is based on what the school policies are like in terms of pay to the teachers as they depend on them for knowledge. Research has come up with several factors which affect a pupil's performance and the teacher pay. The variables identified in this study include: (1) School (2) Organizational and management practices (3) Incentives. Methods Data The analysis of teacher attitudes was based on the state of Georgia. The teachers were selected for participation in this survey through random a stratified random sampling process that was based on urban and rural schools, poverty level schools, and the experience of teachers. A total of 3, 121 teachers that were employed on full-time were included in the analysis that resulted in a response rate of between 65% and 75% and this result relied on the method of calculation. A T-test method was used to test the sampling frame relative to the achievement of the teachers. However, very few differences were found in teacher characteristics in the school level. Table 1 shows the teachers who responded to the survey and their respective schools (Charles & Glennie, 2008). The sample used in this survey represented a few female teachers that were 67% compared to male teachers who were 69% of the entire population. There was a slightly higher percentage of teachers with a degree or higher that represented 59% against 58% for those who did not posses a degree and above. Teachers with fewer years of experience were discovered to be between 10.3 years against 13.5 years. Nevertheless there was no difference discovered in terms of teachers' age, years of teaching, or ethnic composition among the schools. The sample used in this research has a higher average enrollment of students (i.e., 583 against 520 students), and the students receiving free and low price lunch was estimated to be 42% against 40%. There were no differences realized in the students in terms of the school types (i.e., high, middle, and elementary), student-teacher ratio, and mathematics and the proficiency in reading (Cohen, 2008). In order to measure the teachers' opinion on the pay for performance incentives the following questions were used: (1) Do teachers think that pay for performance is an effective way to be compensated for their work? (2) What are teachers' views on the fairness of pay for performance? (3) Do pay for performance incentives attract effective teachers to the profession? (4) How much do the schools favor or oppose to give compensation to teachers who maybe are specialized in challenging subjects such as science and mathematics? The responses and findings from the research questions were measured on a 4-point Likert scale whereby 1 meant strongly opposed to 4 that meant strongly favored. The research also included items and references for the previous surveys in the opinion of teachers pay performance. Findings and Discussions It was discovered that most of the schools in Georgia were willing to pay extra money to the teachers who were involved in teaching and challenging subjects such as the sciences and mathematics. Moreover, more pay was given to the teachers who were working in harsh conditions with low performing schools. 73 percent was favored for this kind of actions from the school heads as compared to 27 percent. This favor of some teachers is in line to the previous researches both in 2003 where the public agenda survey found out that 70 percent of teachers were favored while the US survey in the year 2007 ended that 77.2 percent of teachers were being favored. However, the US survey result was for the teachers who worked in the urban centers who were being favored for higher pay rather than those working in the hard conditioned areas such as the drought parts (Cumming, 2009). Surprisingly, according to this research it was realized that only 0.2 percent of teachers who were in urban centers received higher pay and therefore this brings into the discussion that teacher opposition is not experienced in Georgia. However, according to this survey, teachers with higher experience receive large amounts of pay rise for example those accredited with the National Board Certification. In addition, those that teach in the hardship areas also receiving more cash. Moreover, a study by the US survey showed that there were incentives offered to teachers to attract them to the more challenging subjects such as the sciences and mathematics and in special education (Thomas & Benjamin, 2011). In contrast, some schools (0.4 percent) only offered teachers with challenging subjects incentives, while 0.1 percent offered merit pay. Only 1 percent of the teachers respondent on their attitude towards combat pay and they moreover claimed that they were so dissatisfied with the idea of favoring other teachers in terms of the area of expertise such as in the sciences and mathematics where they receive higher pay. There were hence varied views on this matter of subject-area pay where only 31 percent of the teachers were for the idea against 48 percent as discovered by another survey called the public agenda. While other surveys claimed that teacher performance was to be tested in terms of the scores of the students so that they received some bonuses this was not the case with some other survey that claimed that the respondents said that at times they cannot force the students to study and them need to be paid like any other teacher in other fields or those with higher experiences who were favored (Brodie & Ron, 2008). These research results are consistent with other surveys on the analysis of teacher attitude towards performance pay. The female teachers and those with experience in the field appeared not to be in support of the merit pay, while other groups are in support of the same. This research however shows a mixed result on the performance pay but other studies such as the US Survey determine these attitudes about performance pay were independent of poverty (Cohen, 2008). It is discovered these teachers who are in schools where the students are eligible of low price lunch or free lunch support the issue of teacher incentives. Also the teachers in high school relative to the elementary schoolteachers are in support of the pay for performance incentives. The two findings show these teachers who have a sense of humanity for their fellow teachers do not support the pay for performance incentive while those who have a higher sense of their field of study are in support of the pay for performance incentive. This outcome show these teachers who are more concerned about their fellow teachers are afraid of the pay for performance system that do not favor their colleagues either. Conversely, the teachers who have trust in their principal, are more willing and in support of the pay for performance even though the term pay for performance is not defined in terms of the evaluation of the principal or the field of teaching in which one has experience of. Nevertheless, teachers might consider their area of expertise in teaching as a gauge to accept or refuse the pay offer. The results moreover, is a reflection on the attitude of the teachers towards performance pay and the culture within the teaching profession. The teachers who are gunning for the performance pay in terms of their trust for their field more so the sciences and mathematics teachers claim that this is a reflection on what even happens to students in the classrooms. However, according to the findings of the research, the opinion of the teachers who are given high pay in terms of the subjects they teach, differ in terms of their knowledge about “pay for performance”. This is an indication that their need be proper grounds to define the pay for performance and the conditions under which one is liable for the same. Teachers in middle and high school assignments are in more support of this method of pay and this is so consistent with the expectations that some people have ego how much they are educated. However, on the trust factors where other teachers are concerned about their colleagues this is not fully supported. Nevertheless, teachers who are experienced in teaching are in support of higher incentives as they have self interests. The respondents' impressions about their colleagues were not systematic while those that have trust and respect for their profession are in support of this system of payment. The results also showed these teachers in schools with higher math scores do not support the teacher incentive since they are not likely to qualify. The various attitudes towards the pay for performance is mainly driven by two factors as shown above; the egoistic where other teachers who have more experience or qualified in the challenging subjects think that they should have higher pay than their counterparts and the feeling for their colleagues that feel the need for a uniform paying system. Variable Discussion Incentives The issue of the amount that is given to some teachers as a result of their experience or location affects the performance of the students. Most teachers who do not get this incentive as they feel it is unfair are less motivated and do not put all their efforts in the delivery of their services. School The location a school according to this study determines the incentives given to a teacher; schools located in hardship areas often have teachers who are given higher incentives as compared to their counterparts in other areas. Moreover, the type of school such as the special schools have special pay for its teachers. This form of practice more often demoralizes other teachers in other schools who are not given the incentives that farther affects their service delivery to students. Organizational and Management Practices The decision of the school management to give incentives to teachers that are involved in teaching mathematics and other science subjects while not rewarding their colleagues affects the level of service delivery in schools that farther affects the learning of a student. Questions This section provides the findings of the answers for the research questions and the variable discussion. 1. Do teachers think that pay for performance is an effective way to be compensated for their work? In order to realize the best outcome for students there is the need to involve the teachers. Teacher effectiveness and satisfactory is therefore vital in the school setting. However, the teachers have varied views on the pay for performance as an incentive for their work. Teachers think that if the reformers need to take care of the incentives then it should be uniform among all the teachers regardless of their experience. According to this research, 54% of the respondents thought that other factors need to be considered to effect the student performance in schools and thus the reformers should not look at the pay itself. 2. What are Teachers' views on the Fairness of Pay for Performance? This research discovered the different teachers have different view regarding the performance pay. Some of the teachers only 9% who supported the idea was due to the poverty reasons while 12% was due to self-interest but most of the population thought that the pay is an unfair issue as it discriminates on other people. (3) How much do the schools favor or oppose to give compensation to teachers who maybe are specialized in challenging subjects such as science and mathematics? 74 percent of the respondents thought that most of the schools favor the teachers who have the expertise in mathematics and sciences and are therefore given higher incentives as compared to their counterparts in other subjects. Conclusion It is clear from this research that clear pay structure should be introduced into the education sector for teachers. Other recommendation should be the improvement of the working conditions for the teachers. The issue of the pay for performance incentive should be designed and implemented in a clear way to help the policy makers and the reformers better understand the influence of student performance in school. Moreover, the compensation reforms should be directed in a uniform manner to all teachers to avoid the different attitudes as seen in the research. For example most of the experienced teachers are less supportive of the compensation reforms unlike the novice. This should however not be the case in a free society where we are concerned about the effectiveness of student performance. References Bacharach, S., and David B., (2009). Paying for Better Teaching: Merit Pay and Its Alternatives. NY: Organizational Analysis and Practice Book , Inc., pp. 34-38 Ballou, D., (2009). Pay for performance in public and Private Schools. Book on Economic Education, New York: Rusell Sage Foundation, pp. 51–61. Michael P. (2007). Teachers’ attitudes Toward Merit Pay: Examining Conventional Wisdom. Book in Industrial and Labor Relations 3rd Edition, New York: American Economic Publishers, pp. 50–61. Baugh, H., (2009). Mobility and wage Equilibration in the Education Labor Market. Georgia: Economics of Education Foundation, 4th Edition Book, pp. 253–74. Brodie, C., & Ron S., (2008). Organization and Financing of Georgia Public Schools. Olympia: Office of Superintendent of public instruction, pp. 244-45. Donald J., & James W. (2010). Analyzing the Determinants of the Matching Public School Teachers to Jobs: Estimating Compensating Differentials in imperfect Labor Markets. Georgia Working paper, New York: Rusell Sage Foundation, pp. 701-09. Barbara S. (2009). Trust in Schools: A Core Resource for Improvement. American Sociological Association’s Book, Rose Series in Sociology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation publications, pp. 275-79. Burke, M. (2008). Statewide Teacher Salary Schedules. Denver: Education Commission of the States, pp. 400-410. Charles, E., & Glennie, H.,(2008). Would Higher Salaries Keep Teachers in High-poverty Schools? Evidence From a Policy Intervention in Georgia. Washington : Public Economic Foundation, pp. 1352–70. Cohen, E. (2008). Invisible Ink in Collective bargaining: Why Key issues are Not Addressed. Washington, D.C.: National Council on Teacher Quality Publishers, pp. 234-38. Cumming, G.,(2009). Home Grown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive Compatible? New York: A Book in American Economic Review, pp 260–66. Thomas S., & Benjamin J. (2011). Does Merit Pay Reward Good for Teachers? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment. New York: National Council on Teacher Pay Publishers, pp. 471–88. Read More