Reflection over Guest Seminar 15 Nov 2008
Canisius College and Sekolah Ciputra seem to have different perspectives and practices in merit-pay system. The first institution rewards the teachers and staff equally while the latter uses meritocracy. Write your views regarding this issue.
Langganan:
Posting Komentar (Atom)
20 komentar:
I think merit system is not fully suitable for Indonesia teacher’s payment. It is causes by the level of teacher wealth here are still low and the working culture. If all of teachers already achieve standard level of wealth, this system could be applied. And the culture, Indonesian culture seem view the level of regarding the teachers from seniority. Among teachers them self, they usually want a similar amount of payment because they fell that they are also actively participate in each project in their workplace. If the school board chooses the merit system, it may lead to un-solid team because the lower payment teachers will be passive and do not want to work to gather with the higher payment teachers.
I would prefer to say that equal rewards and meritocracy have their own strengths and weaknesses. Equal rewards give the impression that the school treats everybody equally and applies no favoritism. This will create no envy on the employees. However, equal rewards do not encourage employees to increase their work performance and make achievements as any performance is equally valued. Thus, employees would remain static in their work, be easily satisfied with their work and even worse, they do not care about the success of the school.
Meritocracy is a system that relates rewards to one’s capability and achievements. With this system, a school rewards its employees based on performance, so the better an employee performs, the higher pay he gets. This system motivates an employee to continually increase his performance. He is stimulated to develop his talent and capability to get better and this will benefit the school as good work performance is expected of every employee.
On the other hand, a merit-pay system takes an effective and efficient regular performance appraisal which is an absolute requirement to apply this system. It means that if the performance appraisal is not good or accurate, the merit-pay system can not be applied effectively. So the key to the success of the merit-pay system is the good performance appraisal system which adopts rationality and objectivity. In practice, however, it is difficult to measure one’s work performance, for example, when merit-pay system is applied to educational setting; how well can we measure how a ‘good’ teacher is? What type of behavior should be rewarded? How can we judge classroom performance fairly? Or will the success be measured of the students’ success in UNAS?
In conclusion, before applying the systems, an organization should take the strengths and weaknesses of both systems into consideration in order to work best. I suppose it would depend on the organization which system is suitable for its condition and whether it can make use of the strengths of the system and minimize the weaknesses of the system.
Equal reward system practiced in Canisius College will effect or influence the teachers and staff because they cannot actualize the talents or ideas they have in innovating the school. The system will be an obstacle in developing individual capabilities. Improvements or innovations they have done well are no value because everyone will gain the similar reward. Due to no achievement for them, they do not have support or spirit to work better and it will influence in teaching and learning process. It is contradictory to meritocracy system conducted by Sekolah Ciputra. Here all teachers and staff will compete to gain achievement. By the achievement, they are able to measure their capabilities. Everybody has different talent and will actualize it, and off course will get dissimilar reward. Self-actualization as an implementation of his or her capabilities will be valued. The improvements and innovations will be occurred in the school because the teachers and staff have a spirit to improve or motivate themselves to gain an achievement or successfulness.
I think I will choose merit system since it can motivate the teachers to achieve their great achievement. Besides, the teachers will try their best to enhance their skills since anyone who can get the best result can get the higher payment. Moreover, the merit can be not only the money, but also the praise and facility. As we know that the merit has negative effect which makes the staff will try all the ways whether it is positive or negative ways to get what they want. Despite the negative system, the merit system still bring a lot of positive effect that I mentioned before. For example, when my friend working in an english course, his director gave high incentive if all teachers could make the students continue their study at the course. In fact, this way is very effective to motivate the teachers to work hard to keep their students and teach well. In contrast, the old course that I had taught did not have any incentive at all. The principal had paid only the hour teaching. Thus, the teachers were just easy going and they did not care whether they lost students or not as long as they had students and taught, then went home. Based on the experience, I thought if I were the principal of english course, I would tyr to give incentive to motivate the teachers.
In conclusion, Merit system is effective to encourage the staff to work hard for the school development.
Every school has its own salary policy. Both merit system and equal system have their own strengths and weaknesses. The equal system may avoid jealousy because all teachers may feel that they are are treated equally. In spite of the strength, the teachers will not be encouraged to develop themselves because they think that no matter what achievemnent they get will not affect their salaries.
Merit pay may cause jealousy and tight competition among teachers but it also brings a positive effect. The teachers are encouraged to keep developing themselves. They tend to be innovative and creative.
Based on the explanation above, I prefer choosing the merit system because having the equal salary with different responbillity and ability seem unfair. The merit system will be well applied as long as the culture of sharing knowledge and experiences is still maintained at school. The school also should be able to create the positive environment of competition among teachers so that the stabbing in the back will not be the culture of the school.
In my opinion merit pay system is very suitable with the human right that everybody deserved to get the same right as they did or their contribution that already done. In this case in Canisius college the principal just want to apply the human right among his co-workers but he still respects his employees about what he had done for their school. While in Ciputra it respects other from what he or she had done. It means that the school principal will value someone if he or she can give something very valuable for his or her institution without looking back to its seniority or experiences . For those who can give the best contribution for its school will be deserved to get the reward so this school apllies for the meritocracy. For me this system is also good If the school principal wants to do for the fair play so there is no gap between the teacher who to be liked by the principal because I am scared if there is anyone who never got any pay attention or always to be hated by the principal aauthomatically this kind of teacher never gets the reward because there is always obstacle in front of him.
Merit pay-system has been setting up by the organization (herewith school or institution) since they hired some of teacher or staff in a particular period. That system obviously is given based on demonstrated talent and ability rather than socio-political or family connections factors. They also have some particular regulation to standardize the paying system. Meanwhile, it also depends on the organization policy itself. For instance, some have systems about performance appraisal to evaluate the teachers/staffs before they decided to be a full-timer.
I would like to share my experience that when I came to apply in my school I was having interview part with my future Principal. She explained that paying system had settled up both of the institution and government policy. Furthermore, there are 3 (at least) employment system for probation, part-timer (under contract system) and full-timer teacher/staff which is applicable to receive a pension program. To be a full-timer staff/teacher they have to passed some evaluation which are includes psychological test, peer-teaching evaluation, supervisory evaluation, and able to make science project that related to their skill-competence.
So that, I would prefer merit-pay system because it will fair evaluated base on their ability to do their responsibility and best performances such as how long people work, how hard people work, how skillfully people work, how much training people need to do the work, how much people are contributing to society, and so on.
In my opinion, equal rewards and merit-pay system have their own strengths and weaknesses. Also for each school, every school has different policy whether it uses equal rewards or merit-pay system in evaluating the performance of the teachers. The good thing of equal rewards is that among the teachers there will be no jealousy and no favoritism because they get the same salary. However, equal rewards cannot motivate the teachers to improve their competence. They will be satisfied easily and maybe the way they do the job will be the same from years to years. This condition happened because of there is no performance to be evaluated for each teacher.
On the other hand, merit-pay system relates to the capability and performance in doing the job. The better the performance they have the higher salary they get. Some International and National Plus schools in Surabaya apply this system. Likewise in my school, every year the teachers will be evaluated from their performance. Each teacher will be observed by the principal during the lesson. Also, the evaluation is based on their performance for a year. If they have a good performance, they will get bonus money, and it is around a month salary. Merit-pay system motivates a teacher to continually increase his performance. The bad thing of this system is that the teachers will do anything to get a higher payment though they have to sacrifice their friends. There will be tight competition and sometimes they can use others' idea to get praise from the principal.
I prefer choosing merit-pay system because by having different responsibility in doing the tasks, I think it is unfair if the teachers get the same salary. The skills, time-management, ideas, ability, integrity and loyalty should be considered in merit-pay system.
I think each school has its own policy in term of giving rewards to the teachers and staff. The school has its own reasons and perspectives why the school is doing that. Canisius College rewards the teachers and staff equally, but they give the same burden to them. For example, Mathematics teacher has to teach for 6 hours a week, but Religion teacher only teaches 2 hours a week. To make it balance, the school gives other responsibility to that religion teacher. Here, Canisius College is trying to give the same burden to all the teachers and staff, so that they deserve to get the same rewards.
Sekolah Ciputra sees that capable teacher deserves to get more compare with other teachers who are still not capable (here, the school should have the standard in term of good teacher). This is also a good way in giving rewards to the teacher who is really good in his/her job.
I think the important thing is the school has to explain to the teachers and staff about how the school will pay them or give rewards to them. The school also needs to give the reasons why they are doing that, so that the teachers and staff can understand about that and hopefully they accept it with the whole heart and they will do their job best.
In my opinion, both systems have their own advantages and disadvantages. Merit-pay-system, encourages the teachers to learn and learn. The teachers will always try hard to gain more knowledge to have better salary. They will never stop on learning. However, this system is not good for the teachers who have great loyalty and courage to learn but they do not have high Intelligence Quotient. As it is stated in the reality that ones who have High Intelligence Quotient usually think that they are smart and they quite sure that their words are better than others, so they do not need others’ opinion although their words are not always right. One important thing for the negative side of this system is that it will arouse the egoism among them. They will not share their knowledge to their colleagues because they are afraid of being lost by their colleagues.
The merit- pay-system will be used in my school and I can see how worried the teachers are, to face this system. Some of them are not quite smart but they have other specialty, like patience, high loyalty and they will do everything which principal asks, although it sometimes not related to the job of teachers. They are helpful to help each other, too.
On the other hand, the reward system, psychologically, is good for the teachers to be comfortable in teaching. They will not be too much worried about their salary. However, this system has weaknesses, too. The lazy teachers will work at their own will. They will not care about their achievement in teaching. It is also not good for the school improvement.
To say the least, I think it is good to combine the rules in both systems. So we can get the benefit things from both systems. For example, we can use the merit-pay-system to encourage the teacher to improve their knowledge but still pay attention to their loyalty or other good things of them in increasing their salary.
In my opinion, equal payment system in school has weaknesses. It is occurred in states school. Where the payment is given based on the grade (golongan) and seniority. It is given monthly without judging the performance of the teacher. No matter he or she does work reluctantly or diligently, he or she is going to get the same payment. This system is not fair for those who work hard and full of responsibility. This system also makes teachers are reluctant to get better knowledge for their improvement in teaching. They are who have low spirit, tend to be satisfied with the payment. The great impact of this system is creating the lazy teachers which can not create qualified school.
Differ with merit system that applying the payment based on teacher’ performance and achievement. According to me, everybody who has performed and worked well should receive reward. Because, this teacher has tried to do hard for the improvement of the school. School has to appreciate his effort. This school’ appraisal will motivate him to be better again. This effects will create good competition among of the teachers that finally can improve the quality of the school.
But, in applying meritocracy, it is needed fair appraisal to measure teacher’ performance. It is not an easy job. Therefore, school should carefully think the measurement and who are involved in this measurement before conducting the meritocracy.
In my opinion, both type of salary, meritocracy and equal rewards, will always have their own weakness and strength. While in one hand, the equal type of salary will provide each teacher with the same amount of salary, the meritocracy system will always look upon achievement that each teacher has made. In some schools is Indonesia, such as schools that has adopted the international curriculum along with the international culture of school, usually, the working culture will follow the school culture and the meritocracy system will be suitable. In the other hand, for schools that have still have the Indonesian’s curriculum, usually will use the equal rewards. However, for me, I would prefer to have the meritocracy system since that system will help each teacher to enrich themselves in a positive and healthy way in the knowledge area. Furthermore, in this kind of system, principal’s authority is needed, in a way where he will be the one who will observe the competition that may rise among teachers to enrich themselves. Not just that, the principal will also have to act out when the competition has gone too far and come to hurting one another. However, I agree with this system compare to the equal system since school will appreciate every effort that every teacher makes in order to build a qualified school.
both merit system and equal system have the advantage as well as the disadvantage.
in equal system, applied in Kanisius, is good since they give the same salary to all the teachers with a certain policy. for teachers who have few teaching hours will get another task or work that considered equal with the others whose working hours are many. in short they will have the same duty and the same salary. but it will not motivate teachers to develop their knowledge or ability for the school, since they know they will get nothing for doing something special.
in merit system, in which the teachers are paid based on their ability and achievements, is also good. in this case the teacher will try to do their best to achieve more. But it also has the disadvantage. in this system they tend to compete with others in their own way. I wonder whether they can cooperate well with other in doing everything for the school development.
Based on that explanation i prefer the equal system. but maybe with certain target that the teacher should achieve so that the teacher still concern with their own development.
I agree with both of the policies. Both of them can encourage and motive people in two different directions.
In one hand treating people equally is a good way to motivate people from lower-proficiency level. Appreciating everybody without looking at their backgrounds and problems is the major issue in this option. The same treatment here should have its boundaries. The examples are: eating lunch together (from the foundations to the custodians). People from lower-proficiency level will feel appreciated and proud since they receive the equal treatment like the other who has higher level than them. People like the custodians and securities who usually serve others, and directly got the same treatment will feel happy and appreciated. It will motivate them to do better.
In the other hand, applying the merit system is good to motivate high-achievers.
Merit system can be one of the factors to build motivation among teachers. But there should be boundaries in applying the merit system. If we give the entire teacher the same treatment with the same result and salary, most great teachers will think twice to do their best. The merit system will work well in the form of bonus or extra salary. The best and better teachers will get what they deserve to have. It’s all about fairness.
So both policies will work best if we know the boundaries, where, and when to apply each of them or even the combination of both.
In my opinion, equal rewards and merit-pay system have their own strengths and weaknesses. Canisius College prefers to choose equal rewards while Sekolah Ciputra prefers to choose merit-pay system as their school policy. I, myself, would prefer to choose merit-pay system since we have an opportunity to develop our ability. Merit-pay system is fair for all of the members of the school. We are evaluated based on our talent and performance. Merit-pay system will satisfy each individual “equal pay for equal work”. Merit-pay system also gives an encouragement for individual to know their ability through reward that given by somebody. The weakness of this system is we do not have a close relationship between the members of the school since we always compete to each other to achieve those reward. Meanwhile, an equal reward brings a bad impact for each individual since there is no motivation from themselves to grow and develop their competence. They will think that no need to do best if at the end they get the same salary. They will be easily satisfied with what they have achieved. The good thing from equal system is no envy from other colleague and there is a close relationship among the members of the school.
A seminar about educational organization by guest speakers has been established at Widya Manda University on 15 November 2008. There are two speakers, Romo Baskoro from Canisius College and Hellen Morschel from Sekolah Ciputra , who have given different perspectives in payment principle. Romo Baskoro rewards the teachers and staffs equally, while Hellen uses meritocracy.
In my view, both of the rewarding system have positive and negative site. The positive site of Romo Baskoro’s system are fair, no discrimination. While the negative site is a tendency to reduce the motivation and creativity of the teachers and staff. On the other hand, the positive site of the merit-pay system is a tendency to increase the motivation and desire to achieve a higher knowledge. While the negative site is a tendency to create an envious situation among the subordinates.
In conclusion, both systems have negative and positive sites. So it will be better to combine these two systems, depends on the situation. For example, there is a regulation about the salary increasing depends on the seniority but if the subordinates could get a good achievement, they should be rewarded according to their performance.
Both of merit system and equal system are good, Merit system will motivate the teacher or employee to be creative and motivated initiative in work, but the other side, the relation between senior or junior worse, perhaps the senior does not except when the junior get higher salary than him or get promotion faster the senior.That is why, when we apply merit system in school or organization, the principals or the supervisor should be afair in assessing the employee's ability
In equal system, the teachers or the employees feel safe when they working, since they will assess by working experience (working periode), but equal system will not motivate teachers or employees to improve their ability in working. Because no matter they work hard or not, they still get the same treatment wtih those who work hard
based on the explanation,I prefer merit system, since it will motivate the employee to work hard. Terefore they will have responsibility in working, but the supervisor should assess the employees wisely. If it is needed, the school or the organization involve the other member in assessing.
Both merit system and the system usually used in Indonesia have their own positive and negative sides. The positive side of merit system, which is adopted from America, is used because a school/ organization want to have real qualified human resources working there. Besides, this system can encourage the employees to improve themselves by being long life learners.
While the system usually used in Indonesia, which consider age, will choose a person who has enough experience to be a leader.
But the negative side of merit system is sometimes it will cause unhealthy competition amongst the employees. In addition, people who has worked longer will feel envious to those who just worked and get higher salary / position.
While the system usually used in Indonesia, which consider age, will unable employees who have competences to lead or to get the salary they deserve.
Posting Komentar