Mehlville’s highly ranked educators could soon have an incentive for performing at a higher level than they currently are.
March 1 will mark the deadline by which the Compensation Review Committee must present a workable proposal to the School Board that
addresses the topic of merit pay.
Merit pay, sometimes referred to as performance-based pay, is a system by which educators can dictate their own salary increases based on the performance they deliver in the classroom. Having positive trends in student gains and test scores would mean a higher multiplier for pay, while having lower trends might place a teacher on a performance improvement plan (PIP).
“Underperforming teachers should not be paid the same as the ones who do their job correctly,” said Alicia Woolston, senior.
Two years have elapsed since the issue first came to light, and to the discussion floor. Since then, the Compensation Review Committee has been tasked with investigating the potential benefits of having such a system, and possible ways to implement the system in a fiscally responsible and reasonable way.
Many challenges have arisen, both legally and with regards to feasibility. Systems that have worked in other school districts could fail due to differences in budget, as well as potential hurdles in state law.
The committee, comprised of teachers and school board members, has received input from the community as well as input from colleagues who the new system would affect.
After two years of study and negotiations, the committee has zeroed in on their most realistic model to date.
According to Superintendent Dr. Eric Knost, the proposed model will replace the existing step system to pay teachers. It will allow for the renegotiation of every teacher’s contract on a yearly basis to account for changes in performance.
“It is a unique model, something we have not seen before. It relies on many conditions which must be satisfied, almost like a flow chart, prior to any performance based pay being distributed,” said Knost.
The district would have common goals which must be met before educator performance-pay increases could occur. Proponents believe this is key to making a working model which is less individual-focused. Supporters also believe teachers will be more motivated to strive for higher standards, which will in turn benefit students. Students, those who will also be greatly influenced by any measure, have voiced great support for performance-based pay.
“It will motivate teachers to do their best to give students the guidance they need to learn,” said Andrew Hong, senior.
But even with this proposal, which is considered the best yet, a plethora of issues exist as well as a series of hurdles which must be overcome.
Mehlville consistently ranks among the top in performance in the region, and very few teachers would suffer any pay cuts whatsoever from performance based pay. In reality, many would see a bump in salary based on current Performance Based Teacher Evaluations (PBTE) results, according to Knost.
“If all of our teachers perform well, ballot measures might be needed to fund the performance based pay system,” Knost said.
Compounding the issue is the relatively universal sentiment that a performance pay system would increase competition, and decrease collaboration amongst teachers.
“When many [high-performing] teachers are overlooked, it can lead to a morale problem,” said Dr. John Siebel, English teacher.
Critics also say a competitive system may work for businesses, but must not be used in the education setting because they fear student performance increases might be marginalized for the appealing notion of a salary increase.
Although the board is set to receive final instruction by March 1, the issue may take many more years to finally be implemented in a feasible way.