If teachers feel that their student's performance will have an effect on their own salary. Then teachers will be monetarily motivated to push their students harder. Normally, schools have this incentive(better results, more funding) and teachers receive a fixed pay that gives them no reason to push their students to do their best, apart from the love of the teaching field.

Teachers end up coddling pet-students and ignore/mock pupils that need their help the most.

But if teachers will be rewarded for improving 'the overall' performance of a class,( And not just make sure Mr/Ms.First position maintains his/her high standards) then this kind of unfair elitism will eventually die out.

Competition is a healthy part of the learning process. If children are coddled as equals and spoon-fed, then standards fall: Since children are not prepared for the unfairness in the real-world.

Pedagogy is not the order of the day.Children need to learn how to learn/work independently/with-each-other(develop social/study skills). Teachers should not be pressured into becoming impertinent overbearing pushy people.

Schools where performance is very mediocre have a much better chance of improving, than schools where most students are doing very well.

Teachers 'will' have a higher-pay incentive:

If they improve standards

then they'll get a higher pay.

If a teacher's pay is based on performance, teachers who work with students from bad neighbourhoods and illiterate/non-academic families, will get the least pay; even though they will have to work harder than other teachers to get their students to perform well.

This will act as a disincentive for teachers to be employed in such schools(and conditions for the school and its students will exponentially worsen).

When something is harder and more dangerous it should have a 'higher'-pay incentive as compensation not the opposite.

If teachers get merit pay for the success of their students,then they will strive harder in order to yield successful individuals. And that would greatly help for the success of its nation. Teachers are not just getting into school to teach but also to learn and to study for the betterment of their discussion so that their students would also be interested to learn and be important.

They already do.

Teachers at these schools also go through a tough selection process.

People teaching at schools where performance is top-notch, since only high-merit students are admitted, will get more money for less effort.

The problem here is that undoubtedly the Government will use statistics to judge how well a teacher has done. The easiest statistics to gain will be exam results, and so these will be taken to be decisive. What will not be taken into account is the social development of a child. What will happen is that teachers will only be praised and paid for good exam results. But schooling is surely much more important than a percentage at the end of a year? A school aged child develops through these years and this development can be helped or hindered depending on a teacher’s performance. Surely this too should be taken into account?