GUY: Let's motivate - not threaten - teachers

John Guy
January 15, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

John GuyEvaluating teachers cannot improve results. Human nature does not allow it.

The obstacle is the 80-20 rule, which isinferred from the work of Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto who, in 1906, found that 20 percent of the people own 80 percent of the wealth. In the 1930s and 1940s, Joseph M. Juran expanded Pereto’s thesis to create a new idea, “the vital few and trivial many,” which could be interpreted to mean that 20 percent of the people do 80 percent of the work, or, in any group of 100 teachers, 20 are terrific, others average, and a few are downright unproductive.

An extreme example illustrates the impossibility. This example assumes that weak teachers should be identified and dismissed. The Los Angeles Times appears to have endorsed this view by publishing names and rankings of teachers, based on standardized student test scores for math and English language arts. A similar release might take place in New York City.

Based on rankings, if the bottom 20 out of 100 teachers are fired, demoted or reassigned, who will replace them? The answer is 20 other teachers, themselves subject to the 80-20 rule, which suggests that four of the new 20 will be highly productive, most of the rest average, and a few no improvement at all. Bottom line: Nothing of importance is accomplished by firing and replacing the 20, but their self-esteem and effectiveness is damaged by the process.

A different approach is advocated in Indiana. This approach is to reward the best teachers, through higher compensation and public recognition, and, presumably, to ignore all other teachers. Unfortunately, the best teachers are only 20 percent of all teachers. They teach only 20 percent of the students. Teachers in this category are likely to win recognition, year in and year out, with little effect on the 80 percent.

Also, the potential for resentment among those not recognized could, in theory, lead to progressively poorer performance among them. A more serious result took place in Los Angeles. A teacher ranked “average” committed suicide.

Some argue that all parents have an unequivocal right to know the effectiveness of their children’s teachers. Perhaps, but if a child is taught by a bottom-ranked teacher, what are parents to do? Change schools, where they will find other weak teachers? Request a class reassignment? Reassignment to whom? Reassignment is a problem, especially in small schools, with a limited number of alternative teachers. What if every parent asks for reassignment of their children? What about all the teachers not subject to quantitative evaluation, such as history, physical education, music and social-science teachers? Or are we going to evaluate only math and English teachers? How do we know the evaluation technique is correct and truly representative of performance? How can we be so confident in our data that we publish results?

If evaluating teachers has no practical effect, how do we improve educational productivity? The answer is obvious. Instead of criticizing selected teachers, or rewarding only the so-called best, we should motivate all teachers, by spreading praise, providing first-class facilities and support, raising compensation, giving more personal and job security, more freedom of expression and less criticism and control from above, for nothing stifles creativity like the weight of bureaucracy.

We should respect the individuality of teachers, their status as valuable human beings. We should find ways to motivate all teachers, to communicate pride and gratitude, as parents and taxpayers, for the work they do. Perhaps we should concentrate our expressions of confidence on teachers who work in disadvantaged schools, where teachers have unusual challenges from students and families who live in poverty and in neighborhoods with high crime rates. In these, education is not a priority, and teachers have little community or parental support.

The 80-20 rule has this corollary: Helping the good to improve is a better use of time and resources than helping the best become terrific; this principle applies to management of any group. In business, and in education, the best managers motivate. They do not slash and cut.•


John Guy, a certified financial planner, is author of “Middle Man, A Broker’s Tale,” and president of Indianapolis-based Wealth Planning & Management LLC.


  • Multiple complex factors
    I'm a public school teacher who might be open to merit pay if it were not tied to only one factor, like test scores. If it could be a combination of parent ratings, student ratings, peer ratings, adminstrator observations, and test scores all combined together with equal weight it might be close to accurate. Even then, however, it would promote competition between teachers rather than collaboration, and cooperating in education is essential to succees.
  • merit pay????
    IS A SCHEME and a devious one. just ask jeb bush. back when he was the governor of florida the mic was on he was over heard saying that he had a devious plan. if i'm not mistaken i think it was back in 02 when class size here in florida passed. i think that was why he made the comment because he didn't want the class size to pass. it's been a while. of couse we all know class size is one of the keys needed to ensure students achievement.
  • Rewarding Great Teachers Can Work
    There is a great deal of evidence that just rewarding teachers based on test scores will lead to a hyper focus on test prep

    Consider the following:
    - We want to attract the best people to teaching and we are not doing it now with a one size fits all compensation program

    - If 1 out of 5 teachers were bad, the problem would be worse than it is -- assume the number is closer to 10% -- if you replace them once, the odds are you will make at least one or two mistakes, but after two or three tries you can be at 97, 98 or 99% of teachers being good or better

    - If we involve teachers as partners in developing merit pay -- we are far more likely to wind up with both better teacher training and performance -- and a way to either help low performers improve or leave the profession

    Merit pay can work and we need to do it right

    Post a comment to this story

    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. Why not take some time to do some research before traveling to that Indiana town or city, and find the ones that are no smoking either inside, or have a patio? People like yourself are just being selfish, and unnecessarily trying to take away all indoor venues that smokers can enjoy themselves at. Last time I checked, it is still a free country, and businesses do respond to market pressure and will ban smoking, if there's enough demand by customers for it(i.e. Linebacker Lounge in South Bend, and Rack and Helen's in New Haven, IN, outside of Fort Wayne). Indiana law already unnecessarily forced restaurants with a bar area to be no smoking, so why not support those restaurants that were forced to ban smoking against their will? Also, I'm always surprised at the number of bars that chose to ban smoking on their own, in non-ban parts of Indiana I'll sometimes travel into. Whiting, IN(just southeast of Chicago) has at least a few bars that went no smoking on their own accord, and despite no selfish government ban forcing those bars to make that move against their will! I'd much rather have a balance of both smoking and non-smoking bars, rather than a complete bar smoking ban that'll only force more bars to close their doors. And besides IMO, there are much worser things to worry about, than cigarette smoke inside a bar. If you feel a bar is too smoky, then simply walk out and take your business to a different bar!

    2. As other states are realizing the harm in jailing offenders of marijuana...Indiana steps backwards into the script of Reefer Madness. Well...you guys voted for your Gov...up to you to vote him out. Signed, Citizen of Florida...the next state to have medical marijuana.

    3. It's empowering for this niche community to know that they have an advocate on their side in case things go awry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrst9VXVKfE

    4. Apparently the settlement over Angie's List "bundling" charges hasn't stopped the practice! My membership is up for renewal, and I'm on my third email trying to get a "basic" membership rather than the "bundled" version they're trying to charge me for. Frustrating!!

    5. Well....as a vendor to both of these builders I guess I have the right to comment. Davis closed his doors with integrity.He paid me every penny he owed me. Estridge,STILL owes me thousands and thousands of dollars. The last few years of my life have been spent working 2 jobs, paying off the suppliers I used to work on Estridge jobs and just struggling to survive. Shame on you Paul...and shame on you IBJ! Maybe you should have contacted the hundreds of vendors that Paul stiffed. I'm sure your "rises from the ashes" spin on reporting would have contained true stories of real people who have struggled to find work and pay of their debts (something that Paul didn't even attempt to do).