Photo by Tania Melnyczuk on Unsplash

Is this too much like merit pay? You get paid for results, as if children were widgets?

The article from The 74 Million discusses a pilot program in Texas and Florida, where tutoring fees are based on student progress, introducing outcomes-based contracting in education.

In Duval County, Florida, FEV Tutor collaborates with Edmentum, offering bonuses for meeting growth targets and proficiency in state assessments.

Ector County, Texas, pays Air Tutors and FEV Tutor per session, with additional incentives for student progress.

This approach, emphasizing performance over service delivery, could serve as a model for future educational contracting.

Source: Summary by Perplexity.ai of The 74 article, Under Pilot Program in Texas & Florida, Tutoring Fees Depend on Student Progress

I’m not sure about this approach. Here’s why: 

As important as it is to get something valuable for what you pay, teaching and learning are uncertain. There are many variables that come into play.

From what I have observed, tutoring presents its own problems. Instead of focusing on learning during the day, students are forced to get specialized tutoring AFTER the day is over, resulting in a massive time investment.

Teachers are burned out. Tutoring after teaching a full-day is problematic, and to be honest, teachers don’t get paid well enough for the extra work, much less the work they spend the bulk of their time doing.

This seems like yet another effort to quantify learning (e.g. performance), and may result in more problems down the road as children choose to opt out of school. After all, who wants to be stuck in a “teach to the test” environment, where interactions are solely about what you do?

I need to consider this more. What are your thoughts?