Compensation and Collaboration: A Comprehensive Approach to Improving Teaching Effectiveness

Article PDF | | View on Single Page

————————
Footnotes

1 In the 2009–2010 school year, TAP was in operation in 227 schools in thirteen states – Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas – and the District of Columbia. How we reward teachers for facilitating solid outcomes for students must move beyond the constraints of 
the traditional salary-schedule-versus-merit-pay debate.

2 TAP mainly uses Sanders’s EVAAS model – the most common type – for value-added. Chicago TAP uses Rob Meyer’s Wisconsin model. In statistical terms, 5 is significantly higher than average at about the 95 percent confidence level, 4 is significantly higher than average at about the 70 percent confidence level, 3 is indistinguishable from the average, 2 is significantly lower than average at about the 70 percent confidence level, and 1 is significantly lower than average at about the 95 percent confidence level.

————————
References

Aaronson, D., L. Barrow, and W. Sander. 2007. “Teachers and Student Achievement in the Chicago Public High Schools,” Journal of Labor Economics 251:95–135.

Annen, K. 2003. “Social Capital, Inclusive Networks, and Economic Performance,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 50, no. 4:449–463.

Brass, D. J., K. D. Butterfield, and B. C. Skaggs. 1998. “Relationships and Unethical Behavior: A Social Network Perspective,” Academy of Management Review 23, no. 1:14–31.

Eckert, J. 2009. More Than Widgets: A Systematic Approach to Increased Teaching Effectiveness. Santa Monica, CA: National Institute for Excellence 
in Teaching.
> Available for download

Hanushek, E. 1992. “The Trade-off between Child Quantity and Quality,” Journal of Political Economy 100, no. 1:84–117.

Jerald, C. 2009. Aligned by Design: How Teacher Compensation Reform Can Support Other Educational Reforms. Washington, DC: Center 
for American Progress.

Marshall, K. 2009. “Is Merit Pay the Secret Sauce for Improving Teaching and Learning?” Education Week 29, no. 15 (December 16).

Murnane, R. J. 1975. The Impact of School Resources on the Learning of Inner-City Children. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

Murnane, R. J., and B. R. Phillips. 1981. “What Do Effective Teachers of Inner-City Children Have in Common?” Social Science Research 101:83–100.

National Institute for Excellence in Teaching. 2010. TAP Research Summary. Santa Monica, CA: NIET.
> Available for download

Podgursky, M. J., and M. G. Springer. 2007. “Teacher Performance Pay: A Review,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 26, no. 4:909–949.

Rice, J. K. 2003. Teacher Quality: Understanding the Effectiveness of Teacher Attributes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

Rivkin, S., E. Hanushek, and J. Kain. 2005. “Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement,” Econometrica 73, no. 2:417–458.

Roza, M., and R. Miller. 2009. Separation of Degrees: State-by-State Analysis of Teacher Compensation for Master’s Degrees. Seattle, Washington: Center on Reinventing Public Education.
> Available for download

Sanders, W. L., and J. C. Rivers. 1996. Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Student Academic Achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee, Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.

Springer, M. 2009. Performance Incentives: Their Growing Impact on American K–12 Education. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Van Hook, K., D. Lee, and S. Ferguson. 2010. Voices from the Field: Teachers Describe Their Experience with a Bold System of Reform. Santa Monica, CA: National Institute for Excellence 
in Teaching.

Weisberg, D., S. Sexton, J. Mulhern, and D. Keeling. 2009. The Widget Effect: Our National Failure to Acknowledge and Act On Differences in Teacher Effectiveness. Washington, DC: The New Teacher Project.
> Available for download