Several studies have found that praise and recognition for ones good work goes much further to meet the needs of teachers and others in a school district or school than the concept of “merit pay.”
Dunwell in 1986 presented five myths regarding merit pay as it related to teachers:
Myth 1:
Teachers favour merit pay
This statement contrasts with a number of findings in other studies and surveys. Teachers have been found to favor other rewards rather than merit pay.
Myth 2:
Money is a motivator – more money produces more work.
Research studies did not support this. Money was only found to motivate some people in some circumstances, whose salaries were below market valu.
Myth 3:
Merit pay will persuade highly qualified people to enter teaching.
There is no research to support this. Teachers do not enter into teaching primarily to make money. On the other hand, money is a “dissatisfier”. Many people do not leave teaching because of low salaries.
Myth 4:
Merit pay promotes competion, and competition promotes excellence.
Dunwell asserted that competition will not necessarily promote excellence but cooperation probably will.
Myth 5:
Motivating teachers is a simple matter of offering an extrinsic reward.
The researcher documented that motivational needs vary from one individual to another. Merit pay can actually depress the intrinsic motivation of some teachers.
Andrews’ 1987 and 1988 research for the North Central Association of Colleges and Universities summarized the key core outcome elements he found to run through various recognition programs for teachers:
They were outgrowths of faculty evaluation systems conducted primarily by instructional administrators;
- They avoid the ‘merit pay’ issues by offering the alternative of ‘merit recognition’ to outstanding faculty;
- The faculty, administrators, and board of education or trustees found them to be acceptable ways to recognize their teachers;
- They were usually based upon motivational theories of well known theorists such as Maslow (1954) and Herzberg (1966);
- They are considered successful in accomplishing the goal of improve instruction and faculty recognition for outstanding work.
Recognition programs are still lacking in many educational systems.
One of the three top drivers of satisfaction among teachers was ‘recognition’ in the research of the Gordon S. Black Corporation (GSBC). Nevertheless, some 50 percent of a group of 23,569 teachers surveyed reported teacher recognition programs were still lacking in their schools (Teachers recognized for …, 1999).
Recognition as valued by teachers
The National Association of Elementary School Principals surveyed some of the All-USA winning teachers how the honor of winning the recognition affected them (Million, 2004):
- It boosted self-esteem. Several noted that after decades of teaching in places where they received little recognition for their efforts, the awards gave them and their communities a new sense of pride.
- It renewed confidence in their teaching. Teachers felt that it reinforced what they had been doing and also encouraged other teachers.
- It gave them a voice in their profession. Suddenly they were being asked to speak, write, and apply for grants. People wanted to know their thoughts on educational issues.
- It spotlighted their areas of expertise. One ESOL teacher saw it bring a great deal of attention to the often overlooked plight of immigrant school children and their newly arrived families.
- It inspired them to work harder. One teacher observed that the award “made me see that people expected more of me, and I began to expect more of myself.”
- It validated their ideas. “More than anything,” one teacher said, the award “just reinforced what we have known all along. We are doing the right thing for kids (p.1).”
In summary
Recognition for excellence in teaching has been documented over the years to meet one of the basic needs of teachers. Teachers have spoken about the boost in self-esteem and renewed confidence in their teaching when they were the recipients of special recognition for their teaching. The Gordon S. Black Corporation listed recognition as one of the top three drivers of satisfaction among teachers.
We have a long way to go in providing significant numbers of recognition options for teachers and to spread the awards to far more than presently is being done. My research over the past few years found that one award is the standard in most schools no matter what the number of faculty in a school.
Andrews, H.A. (1987). Recognition in education: reversing neglect. Administrative Action, Stillwater, OK., 1(5), 1-2.
Andrews, H.A. (1988). Merit recognition: The acceptable alternative. ACCT Quarterly, Washington, D.C., 12(3), 24-27.
Dunwell, R.R. (1986). Merit, motivation, and mythology. Teacher Education and Practice, 3(1): 17-21.
Herzberg, W. W. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland and New York: The World Publishing Company.
Maslow, A.H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Million, J. (2004). Honor your teachers. National Association of Elementary School Principals. January 2004, 27(5), pp.5-6. Retrieved February 26, 2006 at http://www.naesp.org/ContentLoad.do?contentld=1145’
Teachers recognized for excellent rate career satisfaction higher. (1999). Harris Interactive. Rochester, N.Y. March 19, 1999. Retrieved March 2, 2006 at http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/printerfriend/index.asp?NewsID=303
About the author:
Dr. Hans A. Andrews is the Distinguished Fellow for Community College Leadership at Olney Central College in Southeastern Illinois and was President of Olney Central College and lives in Ottawa, Illinois, USA. A former secondary school teacher and Director of Counseling and Guidance, Hans Andrews has published six books on Awards and Recognition and Teacher Evaluation. He is an internationally known consultant in the areas of faculty evaluation, teacher awards and recognition and dual-credit programs. His books are available from: www.matildapress.com schooldays bookshop.
|