IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/61030.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Teachers and performance pay in 2014: first results of a survey

Author

Listed:
  • Marsden, David

Abstract

From the autumn of 2014, a new performance pay scheme was introduced for school teachers in England and Wales. It makes pay progression for all teachers dependent upon their performance as evaluated by their line managers by means of performance appraisals. This paper reports the results of a the first wave of a survey of teachers’ views about performance pay and their beliefs about its effects on their performance and that of their schools before the first decisions about pay awards under the new scheme. Further surveys are planned to follow the scheme over time. School leaders were also surveyed. The results so far confirm a broadly negative view among teachers as to the desirability and likely motivational effects of linking pay progression to performance, but they also show a more positive view of the process of performance appraisal. The results are compared with those of a similar CEP survey carried out in 2000 just before the previous scheme was introduced.

Suggested Citation

  • Marsden, David, 2015. "Teachers and performance pay in 2014: first results of a survey," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 61030, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:61030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/61030/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marsden, David & Belfield, Richard, 2006. "Pay for performance where output is hard to measure: the case of performance pay for school teachers," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22871, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Victor Lavy, 2009. "Performance Pay and Teachers' Effort, Productivity, and Grading Ethics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1979-2011, December.
    3. Edward P. Lazear, 2000. "Performance Pay and Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1346-1361, December.
    4. Morris M. Kleiner, 2006. "Licensing Occupations: Ensuring Quality or Restricting Competition?," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number lo, August.
    5. Howard Glennerster, 2001. "United Kingdom Education 1997-2001," CASE Papers 050, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    6. David Marsden, 2004. "The Role of Performance-Related Pay in Renegotiating the “Effort Bargain†: The Case of the British Public Service," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 57(3), pages 350-370, April.
    7. Esther Duflo & Rema Hanna & Stephen P. Ryan, 2012. "Incentives Work: Getting Teachers to Come to School," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1241-1278, June.
    8. Margit Osterloh & Bruno S. Frey, 2000. "Motivation, Knowledge Transfer, and Organizational Forms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(5), pages 538-550, October.
    9. Atkinson, Adele & Burgess, Simon & Croxson, Bronwyn & Gregg, Paul & Propper, Carol & Slater, Helen & Wilson, Deborah, 2009. "Evaluating the impact of performance-related pay for teachers in England," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 251-261, June.
    10. Howard Glennerster, 2002. "United Kingdom Education 1997--2001," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(2), pages 120-136, June.
    11. Marsden, David, 2000. "Teachers before the 'threshold'," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3641, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Karthik Muralidharan & Venkatesh Sundararaman, 2011. "Teacher Performance Pay: Experimental Evidence from India," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(1), pages 39-77.
    13. Howard Glennerster, 2001. "United Kingdom Education 1997-2001," CASE Papers case50, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    14. Michael J. Podgursky & Matthew G. Springer, 2007. "Teacher performance pay: A review," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(4), pages 909-950.
    15. Marsden, David, 2004. "The role of performance-related pay in renegotiating the "effort bargain": the case of the British public service," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 4036, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marsden, David & Belfield, Richard, 2006. "Pay for performance where output is hard to measure: the case of performance pay for school teachers," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22871, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. David Marsden, 2009. "The Paradox of Performance Related Pay Systems: 'Why Do We Keep Adopting Them in the Face of Evidence that they Fail to Motivate?'," CEP Discussion Papers dp0946, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    3. Belfield, Richard & Marsden, David, 2005. "Performance pay for teachers: linking individual and organisational level targets," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3631, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Baethge, Caroline & Fiedler, Marina, 2016. "Aligning mission preferences: Does self-selection foster performance in working groups?," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Betriebswirtschaftliche Reihe B-18-16, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    5. Burgess, Simon & Greaves, Ellen & Murphy, Richard, 2022. "Deregulating Teacher Labor Markets," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. Woessmann, Ludger, 2011. "Cross-country evidence on teacher performance pay," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 404-418, June.
    7. Muralidharan, Karthik & Sundararaman, Venkatesh, 2011. "Teacher opinions on performance pay: Evidence from India," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 394-403, June.
    8. Mills, Brian M., 2017. "Technological innovations in monitoring and evaluation: Evidence of performance impacts among Major League Baseball umpires," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 189-199.
    9. Victor Lavy, 2009. "Performance Pay and Teachers' Effort, Productivity, and Grading Ethics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1979-2011, December.
    10. Barinova, V. A. (Баринова, В.) & Eremkin, V. A. (Еремкин, В.) & Lanshina, T. A. (Ланьшина, Т.) & Pleskachev, Yuriy Andreevich (Плескачев, Юрий Андреевич), 2016. "Restrictions on the Use of Effective (Incentive) Contracts in the Public Sector and Public Service [Ограничения Применения Эффективных (Стимулирующих) Контрактов В Бюджетном Секторе И На Государств," Working Papers 964, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    11. Belfield, Richard & Marsden, David, 2004. "Unions, performance-related pay and procedural justice: the case of classroom teachers," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3632, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Balch, Ryan & Springer, Matthew G., 2015. "Performance pay, test scores, and student learning objectives," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 114-125.
    13. Dora Gicheva, 2022. "Altruism and Burnout: Long Hours in the Teaching Profession," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(2), pages 427-457, March.
    14. Helen Simpson, 2009. "Productivity In Public Services," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 250-276, April.
    15. James Andreoni & Michael Callen & Karrar Hussain & Muhammad Yasir Khan & Charles Sprenger, 2023. "Using Preference Estimates to Customize Incentives: An Application to Polio Vaccination Drives in Pakistan," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(4), pages 1428-1477.
    16. Peters, Jörg & Langbein, Jörg & Roberts, Gareth, 2016. "Policy evaluation, randomized controlled trials, and external validity—A systematic review," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 51-54.
    17. Derek Neal, 2011. "The Design of Performance Pay in Education," NBER Working Papers 16710, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Jones, Michael D., 2013. "Teacher behavior under performance pay incentives," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 148-164.
    19. Karthik Muralidharan & Venkatesh Sundararaman, 2011. "Teacher Performance Pay: Experimental Evidence from India," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(1), pages 39-77.
    20. Nava Ashraf & Oriana Bandiera & Edward Davenport & Scott S. Lee, 2020. "Losing Prosociality in the Quest for Talent? Sorting, Selection, and Productivity in the Delivery of Public Services," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(5), pages 1355-1394, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Compensation packages; payment methods; public sector labor markets; compensation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J33 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Compensation Packages; Payment Methods
    • J45 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Public Sector Labor Markets
    • M52 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Compensation and Compensation Methods and Their Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:61030. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.