Updated Resources The Center for Educator Compensation Reform (CECR) is currently in the process of updating resources on its website, including the Research Syntheses. The CECR Research Syntheses provide up-to-date, concise, research-based answers to key performance-based compensation design and implementation questions. For example, a superintendent of a district with high teacher turnover may consider performance-based compensation to attract and retain more teachers. To learn more about the links between teacher compensation and recruitment/retention, the superintendent can view Research Syntheses that address the following questions: · What effect does teacher compensation have on retention? Does evidence suggest that higher salaries reduce teacher attrition? · How much would salaries have to increase to attract and retain sufficient numbers of mathematics and science teachers, whose specialized skills and knowledge generally command much higher salaries in the private sector? · Does evidence suggest that additional compensation alone is sufficient to attract and keep good teachers in high-need schools? If not, what other changes does the research suggest are needed to solve staffing shortages? · Does evidence suggest that additional pay could overcome teacher reluctance to work in hard-to-staff schools? If so, how big would pay increases have to be in order to be effective? · What do we know about the conditions under which teachers and principals will work for performance pay? · How large do performance incentives need to be in order to be effective? After states and districts complete the design process, they often face other challenges in program implementation. | The following Research Syntheses provide insight into the research on reward structures: What do we know about the conditions under which teachers and principals will work for performance pay? · What factors affect teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about performance pay? · Does evidence suggest that teachers prefer some types of performance pay systems more than others? For example, are group-based performance awards that reward teams of teachers or all teachers in a school more likely to motivate teachers than individual awards? · What do we know about the conditions under which teachers and principals will work for performance pay? · How large do performance incentives need to be in order to be effective? · Does evidence suggest that teachers behave differently in schools that reward individual teachers rather than the entire school for gains in student achievement? Are they more competitive and less collaborative, as is commonly believed? The updated research syntheses will be available online this spring. 
What's New? Hot Off the Press Grantee Spotlight This month’s feature article highlights the Guilford County Schools Mission Possible Expansion Project. Contact Us |
| |
Beyond Pass-Fail: New WA Educator Evaluations—The Seattle Times. March 12, 2011. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/ 2014476704_apwaxgrteacherprincipalevaluation s1stldwritethru.html Washington State will require all school districts to develop new teacher evaluation systems by the 2013–14 school year. Eight single school districts and one consortium of smaller districts are set to finalize their pilot systems this spring. State legislation requires that the districts’ evaluation systems address some general criteria, including the following: high expectations, effective teaching practices, recognizing individual student learning needs, focus on subject matter, safe and productive learning environment, use of multiple student data elements to modify instruction, communicating with parents and the school community, and collaboration. Each district has included teachers and union representatives in the design and decision-making process. 2nd of 3 Reforms Clears Legislature. Funding, Effectiveness Main Concerns—
Idaho Mountain Express. March 11, 2011. http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005135738 The Idaho legislature passed Senate Bill 1110, creating a performance-based compensation system in the state and giving teachers three ways to earn performance bonuses: serving in hard-to-fill positions, taking on additional leadership roles in their school, and demonstrating student growth using a schoolwide measure. | Teacher Pay Bill Expected to Pass, but Educators Are Worried—WISTV.com March 9, 2011. http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=14222574 The South Carolina legislature expects to pass a new law that replaces the state’s current salary schedule with a performance-based system. The bill calls for a committee of teachers to help design the plan with the state department of education. Under the new system, districts would be able to decide on the components to determine teacher pay annually. Opponents of the bill fear that it will lead to compensation based solely on student achievement results. Supporters believe that the new system would provide more accountability and “even the playing field” for teachers across school districts. Connecticut Lawmakers Mull School Reform Delays—New England Cable News. March 7, 2011. http://www.necn.com/03/07/11/Conn-lawmakers- mull-school-reform-delays/landing_politics.html? &blockID=3&apID=b088d3ff745a43a2b8283fe04d5849bf Last year, the Connecticut Legislature passed a set of school reform laws to help make the State’s Race to the Top grant application more competitive. Connecticut did not receive a grant, so policymakers are now considering a two-year delay to programs, including a program that would link teacher evaluations to student progress. The state hopes to alleviate funding pressure on municipalities through this delay. | |
Primary Components of the Program The Mission Possible Office uses five standardized measures of effectiveness: · Value-added data, based on the SAS Education Value-Added Assessment System (EVAAS) · The North Carolina Professional Teaching Standards and Evaluation Process, using evidence-based rubrics aligned to the professional standards · The North Carolina School Executive Standards and Evaluation Process, using evidence-based rubrics aligned to the professional standards · Teacher turnover rate (principals only), reported by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction report card · The North Carolina ABCs of Public Education accountability model school improvement plan The Mission Possible Expansion Project professional development plan strategically capitalizes on the talents of the effective personnel in program schools. The district identifies personnel determined to be effective as master teachers and teacher leaders and provides these educators with extensive training in each measure of effectiveness including EVAAS, value-added data, North Carolina Evaluation Process, and strategies for reducing teacher turnover. The district will provide initial training during the planning year and subsequent training during an annual three-day Enhancing Teacher Effectiveness Retreat designed to advance the skills of effective teachers. These effective educators will serve as resources in project schools and support their colleagues in better understanding the measures of effectiveness used in the performance-based compensation system to improve student achievement. Master teachers and teacher leaders will provide ineffective educators, including those who did not qualify for incentives based upon performance, with need-targeted professional development after school and during planning periods, workdays, the school day (using substitute teachers), and the summer. Master teachers and teacher leaders will align professional development to the weaknesses identified in each ineffective teacher’s summative evaluation. The content of this professional development will focus on the North Carolina Professional Teaching Standards, the application of student EVAAS, and individual teacher value-added data. Goals of the Program The overarching goal of the Mission Possible Expansion project is that all Mission Possible Expansion faculty will be effective based on standardized measures by 2015, and that an increasing percentage will receive performance incentives based on student growth throughout the grant. | GCS also has developed the following sub-goals: · Recruit highly effective educators to work in Mission Possible Expansion Project schools. · Retain highly effective educators in Mission Possible Expansion Project schools. · Increase the capacity of Mission Possible Expansion Project school faculty to be successful in achieving student growth through the provision of schoolwide and need-targeted professional development. · Provide incentives to highly effective faculty who take on additional instructional leadership roles and responsibilities. · Reward educators who are highly effective in Mission Possible Expansion Project schools. Program IncentivesCategory | Description | Amount* | Historically Effective Teacher Incentive | Demonstrate two or more years of above average value-added growth. | $5,000 | Hard-to-Staff Position Incentive | Work in a predefined hard-to-staff position for 50 percent or more of the day. | $2,500 to $5,000 | Individual Performance Incentive | Earn a Level 4 or 5 value-added data teacher effect score. | $2,000 to $12,000 | Schoolwide Performance Incentive | School demonstrates expected or high growth on the North Carolina ABCs of Public Education accountability model. | $750 to $15,000 | Teacher Leadership Incentive | School nominates teacher for a teacher leadership position based on effectiveness. | EVAAS and Data Teacher Leader: $2,000 Teaching Standards Teacher Leader: $2,000 Model Classroom Teacher Leader: $2,000 Mentor Teacher: $1,000 |
*Teachers are eligible for a set amount of incentives, based on their grade level and subject area. Recent Highlights of the Program GCS is committed to sustaining a robust performance-based compensation system for the purpose of ensuring the equitable distribution of talent across the district to achieve student growth in every school. GCS has demonstrated its commitment: in 2005, it established the state’s first comprehensive performance-based compensation system using local dollars. The original Mission Possible Program included 22 schools (including two Cumulative Effect High Schools) and expanded to 30 schools in 2006 with the provision of a TIF I grant. After completion of the TIF I project period, the district intends to sustain the performance-based compensation system. Similarly, the Teacher Incentive Fund III grant will allow GCS to expand the performance-based compensation system to include 10 additional schools for a total of 40 schools participating in the Mission Possible Program. After completion of the TIF III project period, GCS intends to sustain the performance-based compensation system. For more information on GCS Mission Possible, see the program website at http://www.gcsnc.com/depts/
mission_possible/index.htm. | |
Center for
Educator Compensation
Reform
Allison Henderson, Director
Phone: 888-202-1513
E-mail: [log in to unmask] The Center for Educator Compensation Reform (CECR) was awarded to Westat — in partnership with Learning Point Associates, Synergy Enterprises Inc., Vanderbilt University, and the University of Wisconsin — by the U.S. Department of Education in October 2006. The primary purpose of CECR is to support Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) grantees in their implementation efforts through provision of sustained technical assistance and development and dissemination of timely resources. CECR also is charged with raising national awareness of alternative and effective strategies for educator compensation through a newsletter, a Web-based clearinghouse, and other outreach activities. This work was originally produced in whole or in part by the Center for Educator Compensation Reform (CECR) with funds from the U.S. Department of Education under contract number ED-06-CO-0110. The content does not necessarily reflect the position or policy of CECR or the Department of Education, nor does mention or visual representation of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by CECR or the federal government. | |
