Merit-pay system of issuing teachers’ salaries is advised as a tool for making a teacher equal to any other employee who is paid for doing their job better than their colleagues do. Critics assume that the reason behind the failure of public educational establishments to show excellent results lies in teachers being lazy or tired of their occupation, which makes an incentive necessary. However, the proponents of the traditional uniform salary argue that merit-pay is at least impractical within the sphere of education, which cannot be compared to any other business.
The primary goal of implementing a merit pay system is to give teachers motivation essential to succeed. Therefore, policymakers suppose that teachers with their uniform salaries are not motivated to provide a better learning for students. If paid for their achievements, teachers are supposed to strive for a financial reward and create a sound competition within the school environment. According to policymakers, these advancements will make teachers efficient and students – successful.
Taking a closer look at the system of education (no matter whether in public or private schools), we will find out that it does not resemble any other business in slightest. Good teaching is not the performance that can be standardized and clearly evaluated. The aim of good teaching is not a financial reward but knowledge of students that will make them competitive. The result of education does not fully depend on the input of the teacher because of the numerous factors beyond the teacher’s control. The attempts to evaluate teacher’s input have already been implemented with standardized tests, which in fact, evaluate very little. Teachers just try to teach students to cope with tests and neglect their direct duties. This approach is detrimental, and any other similar way to evaluating the input of a teacher will turn as a failure too.