Teacher Pay for Kansas City.
Is it true that everything's up to date in Kansas City? Pay scales for teachers there might enter the 21st century--if discussions of a merit pay plan actually get anywhere.

According to a report in the Kansas City Star, the board of education and the local chapter of the teachers union, the American Federation of Teachers, have agreed to discuss the matter.

Bill Eddy, of the board, says "ItÂ?s an idea whose time has come. I think it can benefit everybody."

Union officials, naturally, are less enthusiastic, and say that the move requires (what else), more money.

Rob Weil, an official at the AFT, says "If youÂ?re just changing the way you pay, youÂ?re not going to get where you want to get."

Au contraire, "changing the way you pay" is exactly what schools need. You do well, you get paid more. You don't do well, you don't get paid well--and perhaps you don't get paid at all.

But old habits die hard.

"[Local union president Judy Morgan] also cautioned against any suggestion that a pay-for-performance plan is needed to motivate quality teaching.

'All of our folks are working extremely hard,' Morgan said. 'No matter what their job, they give all they can give.'"


Oh my. Granted, Morgan's doing what a union president ought to do--defend the integrity of her membership. But anyone with a temp assignment's worth of work experience knows that in a workplace, some will give more, and some will give less.

But actually, work effort is not relevant. What counts is performance. And for too long, teacher pay has been tied not to performance, but longevity and credentials, not whether the teacher is effective.

Union leaders caution that "hard work" lays ahead. Of course. Any evaluation system requires some careful thought and consideration. But the need for up-front work should not in itself kill a move to performance pay. (permalink)