Teacher Accountability and Pay-for-Performance Schemes in (Semi-) Urban Indonesia : What Do Education Stakeholders Think?
Teacher evaluations are conducted to inform employment decisions and teacher professional development with the ultimate goal to create beneficial student learning environments. The effectiveness and feasibility of teacher evaluations, particularly...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/777351581396505992/Teacher-Accountability-and-Pay-for-Performance-Schemes-in-Semi-Urban-Indonesia-What-do-Education-Stakeholders-Think http://hdl.handle.net/10986/33376 |
| Summary: | Teacher evaluations are conducted to
inform employment decisions and teacher professional
development with the ultimate goal to create beneficial
student learning environments. The effectiveness and
feasibility of teacher evaluations, particularly in
high-stakes contexts (hiring, firing, promotion,
pay-for-performance schemes), crucially depends on the
support these evaluations receive from the various education
stakeholders involved. While many governments around the
world, including the Government of Indonesia, are interested
in reforming and expanding their current teacher evaluation
systems, often little is known about how principals,
teachers, parents, and students perceive these evaluations.
This paper uses data from a recent large-scale opinion
survey in Indonesia to examine and provide rare insights
into the attitudes of key education stakeholders towards
teacher performance evaluations. Four key insights are
identified. First, many principals and teachers agree with
existing evaluation schemes employed in Indonesia, such as
the teacher competence test (ujian kompetensi guru (UKG))
and the teacher performance evaluation (penilaian kinerja
guru (PKG)) and are also open to reforms and the
introduction of new schemes. Second, pay-for-performance
schemes are generally popular among principals and teachers,
and preferred over seniority-linked pay systems. Third,
teachers in urban areas are more favorable towards
pay-for-performance schemes than teachers in semi-urban
areas. Finally, all stakeholders generally support the
concept of principals, teachers, and parents fulfilling
performance evaluator roles. |
|---|