Teacher Evaluation and Rewards
OECD Mexico Joint Workshop
December 1-2, 2009
Susan Sclafani
National Center on Education and
the Economy
Teacher Evaluation Systems
• Prerequisites for Success
– Robust Data System
– Valid and Reliable Measure of Teacher Performance
– Support for Improvement of Teacher Practice
• Case Studies from the US
– City of Denver, Colorado
– State of Delaware
– State of Texas
Denver ProComp
Four Components of Plan
– Student Growth
• Annual Objectives: 1% salary increase for 2, 1% bonus
• Colorado State Assessment Program Results: 3% *
• Distinguished Schools: 2% bonus
– Professional Evaluation
• Satisfactory: 3% once every 3 years
– Market Incentives
• Hard to Staff: 3% bonus
• Hard to Serve: 3% bonus
– Knowledge and Skills
• Professional Development Units: 2% salary increase
• Graduate Degrees/Certifications: 9% salary increase
• Tuition Reimbursement: Up to $1000
Denver ProComp
Evaluation Results
– Student Growth
• Great variations in teacher effects on student growth
• Voluntary ProComp participants may be more effective
• Slight majority of ProComp teachers believe SGOs will improve
student performance
– Professional Evaluation
• Majority of ProComp teachers
– Market Incentives
• Hard to Staff: 3% bonus
• Hard to Serve: 3% bonus
– Knowledge and Skills
• Majority of teachers completing PDUs believe it will improve student
achievement
• Tuition Reimbursement: Up to $1000
State of Delaware
Current Teacher Evaluation System: DPAS II
– Quality assurance
• Collection of credible evidence about the performance of
educators.
• Used to make important decisions: recognizing effective practice,
recommending continued employment, recommending an
improvement plan, or beginning dismissal proceedings.
– Professional growth
• Enhancing the skills and knowledge of educators.
• Improve their professional practice in ways that will contribute to
improved student learning:
– Self-assessment and goal-setting, working with colleagues, taking
courses, attending workshops, designing new programs, piloting new
programs or approaches, developing proficiency in test data analysis,
and many other learning opportunities, educators
State of Delaware
Teacher Evaluation System: DPAS II
• Tracks
– Track I, for beginning teachers, promotes growth and new learning
through mentoring, frequent observations, and support systems.
– Track II, for tenured teachers--that is, most teachers in the systempromotes professional learning experiences through selfassessment, goal setting, data collection, formative evaluations,
study groups, action plans, and evaluation in which teachers play
an active role.
– Track III, for tenured teachers needing assistance, focuses on
remediating difficulties and recommending further action.
• Future Plans
– Add student achievement based on state tests as factor
– Offer incentive pay
State of Texas
Governor’s Educator Excellence Grant (GEEG)
– Provided three-year grants to 99 schools that are in the top
third of schools serving highly disadvantaged students and
earning an accountability system rating of exemplary or
recognised.
– 75% of the funds go to teachers determined by the school
through objective measures to have demonstrated impact on
student achievement and collaboration.
– School developed plan and had to use gains in student test
scores, measures teacher collaboration, and can add
subjective measures of teacher collaboration, teaching in hard
to staff positions, and teacher initiative and commitment
– Results
• No clear evidence of impact on student achievement
• No evidence that plan design components had impact on student
achievement growth
• Greater the size of incentive, lower the attrition rate
State of Texas
Texas Educator Excellence Grants Program, (TEEG)
– Awarded incentives to schools serving proportions of
disadvantaged students that fall in the top half of the state
distribution and that have achieved either high scores or
great improvement of scores on the state accountability
tests.
– Required that 75% of the funds go to teachers determined
by the school through objective measures to have
demonstrated impact on student achievement and
collaboration.
– Results
• No impact on student achievement though more targeted and datadriven instructional practices used by those getting incentives
• Sharp increase in teacher turnover among those who did not
receive awards or received small awards
• Marked increase in teacher retention among those teachers who
received high bonus amounts ($3 000)
State of Texas
District Awards for Teacher Excellence (DATE)
– Allows school districts to design own plan.
• 50+% opened program to all schools
• 40% limited participation to selected schools
– Requires that at least 60% of the funds reward
teachers determined by the school to be most
effective; 40% can be used for teacher stipends,
teacher mentors, principal incentives, awards to other
employees or TAP
– Results not yet available
Common Issues
• Quality of Teacher Evaluation System
• Timing of Use in Incentive Program
– Only After Teachers Understand and Respond to
Evaluation Feedback (DE)
– Evaluation Done Every Three Years in Denver
(Denver)
• Use of Test Scores
– Required, But Allowed Other Measures of
Student Achievement (Texas)
– Counted Them Only For Teachers of Math and
English/Reading, Gr. 3-HS (Denver )
– Will Use Them After Thorough Implementation of
Teacher Evaluation
Implementation Issues
• Development of a Performance Improvement
Strategy and Plan
• Identification of “Champion” for the Plan
• Constant Communication with Stakeholders
• Development of Broad Political Support
• Budget for Extra Staff Time and Consultants
• Design of a Pilot Program to Test Design
• Continued Engagement of Top Management