Test Tampering in Education – Prepare for More
- May 5th, 2011
- Posted in Systems Thinking and Education
- Write comment
Shocked . . . not really. Irregularities in the DC education system may or may not have happened. The predictability of tampering in a system that bases salary and rewards for teachers on test scores is asking for trouble. The education system will bend to the way we design them.
Michelle Rhee is no hero. In fact the likes of Indiana State Superintendent Tony Bennett, Governor Mitch Daniels and Education Secretary Arne Duncan are making things worse for education. Not just a little, but a lot. This doesn’t mean that they aren’t well-intended they just lack knowledge on how to optimize systems.
Merit pay or salary based on achievement will lead to tampering with test scores in a number of fashions. National and state budgets will now have to add more inspection and monitoring fees to oversee tests to escape the inevitable teaching to tests and erasing of answers.
When the purpose of teaching becomes a test score, you will get people’s attention. But does anyone in business take a multiple choice test with a number 2 pencil? Hardly, and we are digging a grave for achievement by doing more of the wrong thing. Teaching kids to learn, not take tests, should be our aim.
Teachers need to work in a system that enables them. They are closest to the work and knowledgeable about what is happening in the classroom. They are not to be persecuted by politicians and administrators but embraced as potential answers to the problems we face in education.
Clueless business executives turned politicians are perpetuating a bad system in the design and management of our education system. Let’s get rid of the assumptions that surround this design. Merit pay is a design flaw. I wrote about this in an article for IQPC called Better Thinking: The Case Against Targets, Incentives, Rewards, Performance Appraisals and Ranking Workers.
Merit pay and pay for performance will change behavior, but not in a positive way. The result is a focus on test scores . . . not learning.
Tripp Babbitt is a speaker, blogger and consultant to service industry (private and public). His organization helps executives find a better way to make the work work. Read his articles at Quality Digest and his column for CustomermanagementIQ.com Download free from www.newsystemsthinking.com “Understanding Your Organization as a System” and gain knowledge of systems thinking or contact us about our intervention services at info@newsystemsthinking.com. Reach him on Twitter at www.twitter.com/TriBabbittor LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/trippbabbitt.
I attempted to post this on the article blot, but it failed, so here tis:
I think the idea of ‘reward’ is mistaken. One compensates staff, and the market will tell you what the level of compensation should be.
If part of the compensation is a distribution of profit, that should be to the productive ‘team’ not a singled out individual (who’s high performance is a result of the interaction of capability, psycho-social environment, operating system, luck and personal capability). If a person is a high performer, maybe they need to be promoted (not out of their area of expertise, but within it: so pay can reflect sustained performance, but ‘reward bonuses’ break apart a system).
Then, the role of management is not only to build the system, but to work with their staff to identify capability or performance lapses: the response is train, coach, understand, find system errors, and counsel staff who aren’t performing. If all that doesn’t work (may be a square peg round hole problem) help them to move within the organisation, redesign their role or work, or help them exit if that’s needed.