I was somewhat bemused by Andrew Oswald's argument in favour of PRP. He believes that "paying for things works", suggesting it "fosters talent", yet in the next breath berates people for being "obsessed with envy and what others do and earn".
Surely rewarding people through PRP to "perform" well and work long hours is based on the assumption that motivation is extrinsic, financially determined and competitive, and therefore inevitably encourages that very envy which he finds so distasteful, fostering greed rather than talent.
If "paying for things works" will the next step be to offer financial rewards to children in return for good examination and test results? What sort of tyrants would a policy like that produce? What sort of teachers will PRP produce?
In the heady world of economics where money is god, Professor Oswald seems to have lost contact with people who actually love teaching and learning, don't watch the clock and believe there is more to life than money and trampling on others in the race to the top. Although subject to performance management and in spite of achieving my targets, I refused to apply to cross the Threshold and was demoted. I am not the only one.
Thankfully not everyone can be bought.
Christine Lees,nbsp;Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland