Paying Teachers for Performance: November 2009

8/14/2019 Paying Teachers for Performance: November 2009

1/27

Paying Teachers for PerformancePaying Teachers for Performance

An Overview and Update of ProgramsAn Overview and Update of Programsin Colorado and Other Statesin Colorado and Other States

Prepared February 2008Prepared February 2008

Updated November 2009Updated November 2009

Ben DeGrow, Education Policy Analyst, Independence Institute

[email protected]


2/27

Speaking & Writing onSpeaking & Writing onTeacher Performance PayTeacher Performance Pay

American Legislative Exchange Council

Legislative Briefing and Testimony

Good Day Colorado (Fox31)

News Radio 850 KOA Amy Oliver Show (1310 KFKA)

School Reform News (national)

Education News Colorado Various community groups & forums


3/27

OverviewOverview

1) Teacher Quality &

Compensation Models

2) Compensation Reform inColorado

3) Compensation ReformNationwide


4/27

Teacher Quality & Compensation ModelsTeacher Quality & Compensation Models

Teacher Quality = Single Most ImportantEducational Factor (Public Policy) Fewer top-notch students are being attracted to the

teaching profession Steady decline since the 1960s

Not an indictment of individual efforts orachievements

Part of the problem is a compensation system thatrewards career longevity over professional excellence


5/27

Teacher Quality Makes a Difference One year of a great teacher vs. an average

teacher is worth 5 percentile points in test

scores Three years in the classroom of a great

teacher vs. a poor teacher is worth 50

percentile points in test scores



6/27

SINGLE SALARY SCHEDULE(steps and lanes)

1921: Denver & Des Moines become first 2school districts on single salary schedule

Since 1950, nearly all districts pay teachersbased on YEARS & CREDIT HOURS

On average, each years gain + Cost of Living= 6% pay raise, regardless of teacher quality



7/27

SINGLE SALARY SCHEDULE(steps and lanes)

Designed primarily to eliminate inequities for femaleteachers entering workforce

This industrial model ignores highly relevantdifferences (e.g., success with students, difficulty ofassignment, scarcity)

The single-salary schedule is highly inefficient andcant be sustained indefinitely

No correlation of performance with advanced degrees orexperience after the first few years Teacher raises based on seniority & credentials make up

roughly 12 percent of school district budgets



8/27


Divided Teacher Opinion 38% of teachers favored rewards based on

students standardized score achievement

48% of teachers favored rewards based on value-added assessment, orstudent growth

57% of teachers favored rewards based on NationalBoard certification

67% of teachers favored rewards based on time

commitments and work ethics 70% of teachers favored rewards based on tougher

school assignments


9/27

Pay-for-Performance: Some Policy Questions How will performance be measured?

What goal is trying to be achieved?

Bonuses vs. permanent salary increases? How many rewards can be paid out?

How significant will the rewards be?

Rewards to individuals or groups? Whose input should dictate the program?

How will the program be funded now & future?

Teacher Quality & Compensation Models


10/27

OverviewOverview

1) Teacher Quality &Compensation Models

2) Compensation Reform in

Colorado



11/27

Compensation Reform in ColoradoCompensation Reform in Colorado

Strongholds of Teacher Compensation ReformDOUGLAS COUNTY Performance-Based Pay Plan

(1994): performance-, knowledge-, & skills-based pay;

responsibility pay; group incentivesEAGLE COUNTY Teacher Advancement Program (2002)

ADAMS 14 [COMMERCE CITY]: Group bonuses basedon meeting CSAP target growth

DENVER PROCOMP (2006)


12/27


Charter School Performance Pay Liberty Common School (Fort Collins, K-8) Borrowed from business model

Based on performance evaluations in 6 areas(measuring longitudinal student growth onassessments is under investigation)

Emphasis on performance & results, not on

activity or effort Embraces subjectivity, recognizes limitations


13/27


Charter School Performance Pay The Classical Academy (Colo Springs, K-12) Started out as pure merit pay, evolved

2nd generation Strategic Compensation 3 Factors = Merit, Market, Loyalty

Moved to more objective, predictable criteria

Also recognizes preparation, compatibility withschool philosophy, extra contributions, teamworkand leadership


14/27


Charter School Performance Pay KIPP-Sunshine Peak Academy (Denver, K-8)NEW: 2009-2010 School Year

Three pathways: New, Associate, Senior Teachers

Performance pay scale: Four indicatorsStudent achievement / growth (50%)

Overall school performance: DPS framework (20%)

Demonstrated competencies in pathway (20%)

Commitment to excellence, model school values (10%)

Awarded as year-end bonuses


15/27


Eagle County in Transition 1st school district in Colorado completely off

the single-salary schedule

Version 2.0 (2007): revised technical designfor assessments; simplified, transparent Up to 4% bonus based on student assessments

Up to 4% salary raise based on evaluations

Other negotiated/inflationary increases available

Sustainable: 1% local override, TIF grant


16/27


Fort Lupton Teacher Incentive Fund (2007) Federal TIF grant sought as part of effort to

reduce massive teacher turnover (all high-

poverty Title I Schools) Group bonuses available for schools that meet

growth targets in AYP, CSAP ($2,000 cap) including improvements in subgroups

Includes rewards for principals Year 3 of 5-year grant


17/27


Harrisons REAL Program (2007) Brainchild of Superintendent Mike Miles Three types of rewards:

Group bonuses for meeting AYP growth targets (up to$1,000 / teacher) Tuition reimbursements for coursework that enhances

teaching of Math and Literacy across curriculum, andfor hard-to-fill endorsements (e.g. Special Education)

Distinguished Performance evaluations (up to $3,000) Annual caps ($4,000/teacher; $5,000/principal) Primary funding: Federal TIF Grant


18/27

OverviewOverview

1) Teacher Quality &Compensation Models

2) Compensation Reform inColorado



19/27

Compensation Reform NationwideCompensation Reform Nationwide

1980s Merit pay & career ladderprograms many tried, most abandoned

Missouri, Arizona

1990s School-wide award programs

Georgia, North Carolina

2000s New wave of reform

Teacher Advancement Program


20/27


Minnesota Q-Comp Program

Only full-fledged, statewide adoption of TeacherAdvancement Program (TAP) model

Includes Multiple Career Paths, EmbeddedProfessional Development, and Peer Review

Uniquely designed as categorical general fundrevenue: sustainable financing

Up to $190/pupil in state aid 39 Districts & 21 Charter Schools (Jan 2008)


21/27


Texas: District Awards for TeacherExcellence (2006)

Non-competitive grants to school districts that

develop their own performance pay plan (oradopt the Teacher Advancement Program)

At least 60% of funds to reward teachers and

principals for improving student performance


22/27


Florida: From STAR to MAP Conditional state grants to school districts

STAR (Special Teachers Are Rewarded, June 2006): State test must be primary evaluation factor

Awards limited to top 25% of teachers

Teacher association buy-in

MAP (Merit Award Program, March 2007): Student performance at least 60% of factor

No cap on number of teachers Plans subject to collective bargaining

One-third of districts participate: program fundingcontingent on revenues available to state budget


23/27


Lessons from Little Rocks AchievementChallenge Pilot Project

Merit pay can have real, measurable impact on

student academic growth (reading & math) No evidence of more innovation, harder work from

teachers (common pro arguments)

No evidence of divisive competition, negative work

environment, or avoiding low-performing students(common anti arguments)

Transparency is necessary when implementingperformance pay programs


24/27

SUMMARYSUMMARY

1. The single salary schedule is unsustainable,not aligned with 21st century education goals

2. Supporting the concept of performance pay is

not enough3. Improved assessment and evaluation tools areneeded

4. You get what you pay for

5. In most contexts, employee buy-in will becrucial if not at first, eventually

6. Its time to re-think the debate


25/27

SourcesSources

William L. Sanders and June C. Rivers, Cumulative and Residual Effects ofTeachers on Future Student Academic Achievement(1996)

Bryan C. Hassel, Better Pay For Better Teaching: Making TeacherCompensation Pay Off in the Age of Accountability(2002),http://www.ppionline.org/documents/Hassel_May02.pdf

National Council on Teacher Quality, Increasing the Odds: How Good PoliciesCan Yield Better Teachers, http://www.nctq.org/nctq/images/nctq_io.pdf

Eric A. Hanushek, John F. Kain, Steven G. Rifkin, The impact of individualteachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data, Econometrica(March 2005)

Marguerite Roza, Frozen Assets: Rethinking Teacher Contracts Could FreeBillions for School Reform (2007),http://www.educationsector.org/research/research_show.htm?doc_id=436576

Robert Holland, Merit Pay for Teachers: Can Common Sense Come to PublicEducation?(2005), http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/docs/708.pdf

The Teaching Commission, Teaching at Risk: A Call to Action (2006),http://www.policypointers.org/page_58.htm
http://www.ppionline.org/documents/Hassel_May02.pdfhttp://www.nctq.org/nctq/images/nctq_io.pdfhttp://www.educationsector.org/research/research_show.htm?doc_id=436576http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/docs/708.pdfhttp://www.policypointers.org/page_58.htmhttp://www.policypointers.org/page_58.htmhttp://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/docs/708.pdfhttp://www.educationsector.org/research/research_show.htm?doc_id=436576http://www.nctq.org/nctq/images/nctq_io.pdfhttp://www.ppionline.org/documents/Hassel_May02.pdf


26/27

More SourcesMore Sources

Frederick M. Hess and Martin R. West,A Better Bargain: Overhauling TeacherCollective Bargaining for the 21st Century(2006), http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdf

Dan Goldhaber, Teacher Pay Reforms: The Political Implications of RecentResearch (2006),http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/12/pdf/teacher_pay_report.pdf

Center for Teaching Quality, Performance Pay for Teachers: Designing a

System that Students Deserve (2007),http://teacherleaders.org/teachersolutions/index.php Emily A. Hassel and Bryan C. Hassel, Improving Teaching Through Pay for

Contribution (2008),http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0711IMPROVINGTEACHING.PDF

Public Agenda Survey, Stand by Me: What Teachers Really Think aboutUnions, Merit Pay, and Other Professional Matters (2003),

http://www.publicagenda.org/specials/standbyme/standbyme.htm Center for Educator Compensation Reform, U.S. Dept. of Education, http://

cecr.ed.gov
http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdfhttp://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdfhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/12/pdf/teacher_pay_report.pdfhttp://teacherleaders.org/teachersolutions/index.phphttp://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0711IMPROVINGTEACHING.PDFhttp://www.publicagenda.org/specials/standbyme/standbyme.htmhttp://cecr.ed.gov/http://cecr.ed.gov/http://cecr.ed.gov/http://cecr.ed.gov/http://www.publicagenda.org/specials/standbyme/standbyme.htmhttp://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0711IMPROVINGTEACHING.PDFhttp://teacherleaders.org/teachersolutions/index.phphttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/12/pdf/teacher_pay_report.pdfhttp://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdfhttp://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/PDF/Papers/BetterBargain.pdf


27/27

More SourcesMore Sources

National Institute for Excellence in Teaching, http://www.talentedteachers.org Eagle County Teacher Advancement Program, http://

eagleschools.net/teachers/teacheradvancementprogram Fort Lupton Teacher Incentive Fund Program, http://ftlupton.k12.co.us Minnesota Q-Comp Program,

http://children.state.mn.us/MDE/Teacher_Support/QComp/index.htm

Texas Educator Excellence Grant Program,http://www.tea.state.tx.us/opge/disc/EducatorExcellenceAward/EdExcellenceAwar

Florida Merit Award Program (MAP), http://www.fldoe.org/PerformancePay/ David Figlio and Lawrence Kenny, Individual Teacher Incentives and Student

Performance, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No.W12627

Year Two Evaluation of the Achievement Challenge Pilot Project in the LittleRock Public School District, http://uark.edu/ua/der/Research/merit_pay/year_two.html
http://www.talentedteachers.org/http://eagleschools.net/teachers/teacheradvancementprogramhttp://eagleschools.net/teachers/teacheradvancementprogramhttp://ftlupton.k12.co.us/http://children.state.mn.us/MDE/Teacher_Support/QComp/index.htmhttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/opge/disc/EducatorExcellenceAward/EdExcellenceAward_RFA.htmlhttp://www.fldoe.org/PerformancePay/http://uark.edu/ua/der/Research/merit_pay/year_two.htmlhttp://uark.edu/ua/der/Research/merit_pay/year_two.htmlhttp://uark.edu/ua/der/Research/merit_pay/year_two.htmlhttp://uark.edu/ua/der/Research/merit_pay/year_two.htmlhttp://www.fldoe.org/PerformancePay/http://www.tea.state.tx.us/opge/disc/EducatorExcellenceAward/EdExcellenceAward_RFA.htmlhttp://children.state.mn.us/MDE/Teacher_Support/QComp/index.htmhttp://ftlupton.k12.co.us/http://eagleschools.net/teachers/teacheradvancementprogramhttp://eagleschools.net/teachers/teacheradvancementprogramhttp://www.talentedteachers.org/http://www.talentedteachers.org/

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	education-policy-center
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Paying Teachers for Performance: November 2009

Documents