Teacher retirement incentives + merit pay = “Hmm”

By Eileen Button | Flint Journal
February 21, 2010, 11:30AM
Sometimes two things happen at once that make you go “hmm.”

In her recent State of the State address, Governor Granholm proposed retirement incentives for 39,000 eligible Michigan teachers and school personnel. In theory, once our “old” teachers retire, younger teachers can take their place. Jobs will be created, unemployment rates will decrease and more college graduates will remain in the state.

Those who agree to retire will have their pensions ever-so-slightly boosted. (Those who qualify but refuse to be arm wrestled out of their jobs will be penalized.)

At the same time, President Obama is proposing 50 billion dollars in discretionary funding for education. His focus? Teacher accountability. “Good teachers” (those whose students improve their overall test scores) will be rewarded with merit pay.

So let me get this straight. Michigan would like its experienced teachers – many of whom are merely in their early 50s and in the prime of their careers – to get out of the stinking way. And newer teachers (who, by the way, will not have the benefit of being mentored by the most experienced) have the fantastic opportunity to increase their salaries when their unpredictable students do well on standardized tests.

Well, hot dog!

Yes, I’m well aware that we are experiencing both an economic and educational crisis. However, demanding that teachers retire and offering merit pay based on student performance are both poor solutions.

First, “out with the old, in with the new” is a nice idiom when shopping for new furniture. It is not appropriate when applied to human beings, especially when those same human beings have spent their entire careers educating our kids.

Unfortunately, many believe the stereotype that teachers morph over time into “lounge lizards.”(Kelly Flynn cleverly coined the term in her book, “Kids, Classrooms, and Capitol Hill: A Peek Inside the Walls of America’s Public Schools.”)

Granted, bad teachers exist. Every profession has its loafers. But by its very nature, education demands that teachers keep up-to-date with current trends and strategies. In order to maintain their certificates, teachers never stop learning, growing or adapting.

Suggesting that they no longer have something worthwhile to contribute simply because they’ve accumulated 30 years of experience reeks of ageism.

Second, demanding accountability from our teachers by measuring their worth in student test scores is absurd. Who in their right mind wants to have their compensation dependent on the erratic performance of children?

Anyone? … Anyone?

If we’re going to link a teacher’s salary to student test performance, perhaps it’s time to apply the same principle to other professions.

Doctors’ pay should be determined by the number of patients they actually heal.

Bankers’ pay should be determined by the number of clients they are able to keep out of debt.

Nutritionists’ pay should be dependent on their ability to convince this fast food nation to eat healthily.

And parents should be held to higher standards of parenting. (I would hate to know the percentage of parents who can correctly recite the winners from every season of American Idol, but are unable to name their children’s teachers.)

Most would balk at these suggestions. They would tell me that doctors cannot help the fact that patients fail to follow their advice … that bankers cannot control America’s inclination to spend more than it makes … that nutritionists cannot keep people from fulfilling their drive-through cravings … and that parenting is a private affair. What happens behind closed doors is nobody’s business.

Hmm. Let me think about that.

Eileen Button’s column appears weekly in The Flint Journal. Reacher her by e-mail, buttonhouse@juno.com.