Performance-related pay

I have reading about the Medicare/Medicaid demonstration project which has started to reimburse doctors based in part on the “quality” of their care. To incentivize better results, the theory goes, doctors whose patients’ health improved could get reimbursed at a higher rate. Ah, but how to measure quality fairly, I hear you ask…what about all the things that doctors can’t control? Patients who are obese, patients who don’t even bother to fill their prescriptions… Surely a doctor can’t be blamed if these patients fail to thrive? In education, approaches to increasing the precision of performance estimates include using test scores from multiple years of classes (in other words, increasing the sample size for the estimate); combining value-added scores with other, independent measures of teacher performance, such as Headteachers’ evaluations; and calculating scores at a higher level of aggregation (e.g., for all the teachers in a given subject or for all the teachers in a school, which, again, increases sample size). The model would have to be very complex; few teachers would buy into it and, those that did, would probably find a way to game the system. Many resent the intrusion. Some may drop low-performing students. Others may indeed respond to the incentives—for ego or financial reasons—and actually improve their practice to lead to better outcomes. I welcome the ideas but how it will work in practice. So far, there’s not a lot of evidence that using value-added models to evaluate teaching actually improves outcomes for kids in the real world. There’s not a lot of evidence that it doesn’t. Time may tell.

Ed Smith's key learning points

Ed Smith gave us a handful of simple learning points from his own experiences upon which to reflect: 1. Have a go: Ed urged us all to put ourselves out there and be willing to be judged, whether it be drama, music, sport etc. He quoted Larkin, “Supposing no one played tennis because they wouldn't make Wimbledon?” and he urged us not to sit out but remember that there are huge amounts to be gained from ‘having a go.’ 2. Support people that do have a go: He told us not to underestimate just what a difference you can make by encouraging and believing in those that do put themselves out there; such support can make all the difference. 3. Learn to be self-reliant and challenge conventional wisdom: Whilst acknowledging the role that teachers and mentors play, Ed told us that we should be able to find answers for ourselves. We should be curious, he said, and the best teacher will always be yourself. To be really good, we must grapple with the nub of the problem itself and open ourselves up to new possibilities. Drawing on the example of Dick Fosbury, Ed urged us not to imitate what others had done before or follow a textbook; instead, respect conventional wisdom but build on it. 4. Be a renaissance man: Ed argued that instead of giving everything up to be good at just one thing, try to maintain a good balance. He drew on the example of his final year at Cambridge where he not only had one of his best seasons with the bat but also gained a double first in History! If we’re struggling with a problem, we should try something different. Focus in one area breeds focus elsewhere and so he informed us how we can all be renaissance men. 5. If you’re going to do something, do it properly: Ed’s next point was that it’s better to do a short and effective rehearsal, practice, revision session than a much longer and less effective one. He defined “Concentration as the absence of stray thought” and drew on the Berlin Study of the 1980s as an example of the fact that business is not productivity. 6. Time: Ed argued that the masters of their craft have one thing in common: "time on the ball". They are able to take the pressure, give confidence to those around them, create opportunities for their team, and read and control the game. Ed argued that it is anxiety that makes us feel hurried and rushes us. Federer, Fabregas et al are not always in the thick of the action - often unseen, they work hard off the ball, and never forget that their true role is to run the game and create space for others. The mastery of time is about maintaining options; it comes from a clear vision and a confidence in dealing with the challenge ahead. 7. Back love not money: Ed’s final point was that we should focus on expressing ourselves by doing something that we love. The activity is its own reward: “You can’t coach want,” he said. Ed drew on ‘The Candle Problem’ as evidence of the fact that when we do our best, we focus on the task in hand and let the rewards look after themselves. In sum, I think Ed argued the case for a balanced life and, though it might sound boring, finding a delicate balance is a tricky business, but it can lead to success and, what’s more fulfillment.