ERIC ED488913: Rewarding Teachers for Students' Performance: Improving Teaching through Alternative Teacher Compensation Programs. Education Policy Brief. Volume 3, Number 5, Spring 2005

2005·0.15 MB·English

by  ERIC

Education Policy Brief
Rewarding Teachers for Students’ Performance:
Improving Teaching through Alternative Teacher Compensation Programs
Jonathan A. Plucker, Jason S. Zapf, and Sarah A. McNabb
VOLUME 3, NUMBER 5, SPRING 2005
Do teachers’ salaries reflect their ability to
CONTENTS teach effectively? This is an important SINGLE-SALARY STRUCTURE VS.
question given that teacher salaries account PERFORMANCE-BASED
Single-salary structure vs. for approximately 37 percent of total edu- COMPENSATION
cation expenditures across the United
performance-based
States (Nelson & Drown, 2003). Further- The single-salary teacher compensation
compensation..............................1
more, the objectives of the No Child Left structure has been in place across the nation
Behind Act (NCLB) for increased student for at least the past 50 years (Odden, 2000).
Career ladder systems................2
achievement and the presence of a highly By 1950, 97 percent of all schools had
qualified teacher in every classroom have adopted the single-salary structure (Protsik,
Alternative compensation
drawn attention to this issue. In an effort to 1996, cited in Gratz, 2005), which provides
programs across the country.....2
maximize the return on the investment in monetary rewards and incentives based on
teachers, states and school districts across teachers’ years of experience and the num-
Alternative compensation the country have experimented with a vari- ber of college degrees they have earned.
programs in Indiana...................5 ety of teacher compensation methods, This formula for calculating teacher sala-
including linking teacher pay to student ries makes two important assumptions
Conclusions and performance. Performance-based pay is not about what makes a good teacher: (1)
recommendations.......................6 a new concept, but it is one that is receiving teaching ability increases with experience,
increased attention across the country. and (2) completing additional university
References...................................7 Indeed, many states and school districts are classes or degrees increases teaching ability
exploring alternatives to the single-salary and performance in the classroom (Dixon et
structure to improve teacher quality and al., 2002). The single-salary structure has
enhance student achievement. been criticized for not providing opportuni-
ties for teachers to be rewarded for using
This Education Policy Brief will examine
outstanding teaching methods and for not
alternative teacher compensation programs
holding teachers accountable for students’
and career ladder programs aimed at
learning.
recruiting and retaining highly qualified
UPCOMING POLICY BRIEFS. . . teachers. It will also highlight perfor- In response to these criticisms, merit pay
mance-based compensation programs in systems were developed to supplement the
(cid:57) Spring 2005 No Child Left use in Indiana and other states across the existing single-salary structure. Merit pay
Behind Implementation country. systems provide incentive pay for teachers
Update based on performance reviews and for
assuming extra responsibilities outside of
the classroom (Goorian, 2000). However,
(cid:57) Is the Achievement Gap in
criticisms of the merit pay system exist as
Indiana Narrowing?
well. An often cited concern is that merit
pay systems may promote competition, not
(cid:57) Enriching the High School
collaboration, among teachers. Factors that
Curriculum Through Dual
contribute to this environment include
Credit Courses
administrator-led performance reviews that
may appear to be subjective and competi-
tion among teachers for a fixed amount of
bonus money (Hatry et al., 1994).
In contrast to the merit pay system, perfor- classroom and away from direct contact grams differ in structure, they encompass
mance-based compensation models seek to with students (Odden et al., 2001). Promot- elements of skills- or competency-based pay
promote cooperation and partnership among ing teachers to the administrative ranks pre- programs, group-based performance award
teachers, and to provide incentive pay to all sents two potential problems for schools. programs, and pay-for-performance pro-
qualified teachers. Rather than comparing First, promoting highly qualified teachers to grams (see Box 2.) There are numerous
teachers’ performance against each other, administrative positions takes them out of examples of these programs in place across
teachers are evaluated against a set of crite- classrooms where they have already proven the United States. This section will focus on
ria determined by the school or school dis- their effectiveness and places them into four of the more highly publicized and long-
trict. This system allows all teachers to have positions where they have reduced contact standing programs.
the potential to qualify for incentive pay, with students. Secondly, the promotion of
rather than competing for a limited number highly qualified teachers may result in a
of awards. higher number of less qualified classroom
Milken Teacher Advancement
teachers. The development of an alternative
Performance-based compensation models
career ladder system could allow highly Program (TAP)
are typically more complicated than tradi-
qualified teachers to advance their careers
tional single-salary structure models and The Milken Family Foundation Teacher
while remaining in the classroom.
require significant thought and planning to Advancement Program (TAP) is a perfor-
be effectively implemented. Career ladder systems were designed to pro- mance-based compensation program that is
vide teachers with opportunities to take on being implemented in eight states and sev-
These models force school district officials
new roles or responsibilities in addition to enty schools around the country. TAP was
and policymakers to tackle many difficult
classroom teaching. There are a variety of formed to attract and retain teachers. Four
issues, including the development of a sal-
career ladder systems that work to expand elements make up the TAP program: Multi-
ary structure that rewards good teaching
and provides clear links between teachers’ teachers’ skills and responsibilities. They ple Career Paths, Ongoing Applied Profes-
knowledge and skills and improvements in include performance-based ladders, job- sional Growth, Instructionally Focused
student performance. The allocation of enlargement ladders, and professional Accountability, and Performance-based
funding to support a performance-based development ladders (NASBE, 2002). As Compensation. TAP allows teachers to
compensation model is an additional chal- described in Box 1, teachers progressing up explore career options while staying in the
lenge faced by those put in charge of devel- these career ladders can be rewarded for classroom. Teachers can become part of the
oping such a program (Education their efforts in a number of areas. More leadership team by taking positions as mas-
Commission of the States, 2001). importantly, these career ladders allow ter or mentor teachers. The leadership team
teachers to progress along their career path evaluates teachers and sets annual goals for
without removing them from the classroom. staff and students.
CAREER LADDER SYSTEMS Under TAP, all teachers are given time dur-
ing the school day to plan and meet with
In addition to performance-based compen- ALTERNATIVE COMPENSATION other teachers for professional growth.
sation methods, some states and school dis- PROGRAMS ACROSS THE Master or mentor teachers lead the group
tricts have developed career ladders. As sessions to address goals and facilitate the
COUNTRY
with other professions, many teachers seek growth of individual teachers through
out opportunities for promotion to gain States and school districts across the country reflection. Certified evaluators assess teach-
increases in pay and responsibility. Many have designed and implemented variations ers four to six times a year. Teachers are
times these promotions are to administra- of the performance-based compensation and compensated based on their roles, responsi-
tive positions which take teachers out of the career ladder programs. While these pro- bilities, evaluations, and student success.
Teachers are also compensated for working
in hard-to-staff schools.
Box 1. Types of Career Ladder Systems Studies of TAP schools in Arizona and
Performance-Based Ladders Allow teachers to take on more responsibility as South Carolina have yielded positive results
they demonstrate their ability to do so. Teachers
regarding increased student achievement.
may progress through a series of levels that may
Seven schools in Arizona implemented the
include novice teacher, career teacher, and master
Milken TAP program during the 2000-01
teacher (NASBE, 2002).
and 2001-02 school years. The number of
Job-Enlargement Ladders Allow teachers to take increased responsibility for
non-classroom-related activities. Activities may Arizona students participating increased
include curriculum development, supervising and from 949 in 2000-01 to 1,571 in 2002-03
mentoring beginning teachers, and serving as a (Schacter et al., 2004). In order to determine
professional development trainer or lead teacher the effectiveness of TAP schools, control
(NASBE, 2002). schools from the state of Arizona were cho-
Professional Development Determine advancement based on the amount of sen. The schools chosen matched the TAP
Ladders additional knowledge and skills teachers develop
schools based on characteristics including
over the course of their career. Skills may be
achievement, school size, percent minority
obtained through university coursework,
students, school configuration, and location.
professional development activities, advanced
degrees, or NBPTS certification (NASBE, 2002).
REWARDING TEACHERS FOR STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE — 2
Box 2. Performance-Based Compensation Models
Skills- or Competency- Works to measure and reward the knowledge and Professional Compensation
Based Pay skills teachers develop over the course of their career.
System for Teachers (ProComp)
(cid:127) Measured in the areas of depth of subject
knowledge, expertise in instruction and
Based on a pilot program that demonstrated
curriculum development, or knowledge in
promising results, the Denver (Colorado)
areas such as guidance counseling or parent
outreach (Kelley & Odden, 1995). Public Schools (DPS) and the Denver Class-
(cid:127) Salary increases can be linked to the room Teachers Association (DCTA) ratified
development of skills needed by the school a new compensation system for Denver’s
district, licensure in additional content areas, teachers in March 2004. ProComp will pay
or NBPTS certification. annual salary increases to teachers whose
Performance-Based Pay Rewards teachers’ performance measured against a students have demonstrated academic
set of standards developed by the school district. improvement and to teachers in schools that
(cid:127) Performance ranges from student standardized
are judged to be distinguished based on their
exam performance to teachers’ additional
gains in performance. Additionally, teachers
responsibilities outside of the classroom.
will be rewarded for demonstrating the
(cid:127) Incentives for performance can be awarded to
acquisition of additional knowledge and
individual teachers or to groups of teachers.
skills that are related to student growth and
Pay At-Risk Performance Requires employees to put a certain portion of their
Awards base salary “at-risk” until they meet established their specific academic discipline (Denver
performance goals. Public Schools, 2004).
(cid:127) Performance goals can be set by the school The DPS plan will also offer incentives for
district and may include completing advanced
accomplished teachers who choose to work
training or having teachers work together to
in schools within the district that are in aca-
complete a task that is of great importance to
demic need. Similar bonuses will be avail-
the school or district (Kelley & Odden, 1995).
able to teachers and specialists who fill
Group-Based Encourages teachers to work cooperatively and to
Performance Awards improve students’ performance. positions that lack qualified applicants
(cid:127) Awards may be used for faculty and staff (Denver Public Schools and Denver Class-
bonuses, or for curriculum development or room Teachers Association Joint Task Force
faculty and staff professional development on Teacher Compensation, 2004a).
opportunities (Kelley & Odden, 1995).
Denver Public Schools encountered several

problems in the implementation of its pay-
for-performance program. These problems
included linking teacher and student data in
During 2000-01, 1,625 students from con- In South Carolina, three elementary and
a variety of databases and assessing nonaca-
trol schools made up the sample; in 2001-02, three middle schools implemented the TAP
demic teachers’ performance (e.g., nurses)
the comparison school sample was 1,353; program beginning in 2002. In 2002-03,
(Gratz, 2005). Based on these issues, the
and in 2002-03, the control sample included South Carolina had 2,154 students enrolled
program was revised in 2004 to include fea-
2,400 students. Student achievement in TAP schools. The sample of control stu-
tures such as incentives for teachers to earn
between these groups was measured utiliz- dents for South Carolina was 1,628
professional development units, meet stu-
ing the reading, mathematics, and language (Schacter et al., 2004). Similarly to Arizona,
dent growth objectives, and serve in hard-to-
scale scores of the Stanford Achievement comparison schools were selected from all
staff assignments and hard-to-serve schools
Test for students in Grades 2-8 enrolled in schools within South Carolina and matched
(Gratz, 2005).
TAP and control schools (Schacter et al., with TAP schools based on reading and
2004). The Stanford Achievement Test is math performance on the Palmetto Denver Public Schools conducted an analy-
designed to measure students’ abilities in the Achievement Challenge Test (PACT). sis of its pilot pay-for-performance program
areas of reading, language, and mathemat- Comparison of student achievement at TAP to determine the impact of the program on
ics. More specifically, the Stanford Achieve- and control schools was based on Grades 3- student achievement. Beginning in the fall of
ment Test covers skills such as reading 8 students’ reading/language arts and math 1999, 12 DPS schools participated in the
vocabulary, reading comprehension, lan- scores on the PACT (Schacter et al., 2004). pilot program. In 2002-03, the final year of
the pilot, 16 elementary, middle, and high
guage mechanics and expression, and math-
TAP schools in South Carolina saw similar
schools were participating in the pilot pro-
ematics problem-solving.
results to TAP schools in Arizona. In mathe-
gram (Community Training and Assistance
matics, four of the TAP schools outper-
Center, 2004). Students at participating pilot
Between 2000 and 2003, the majority of formed control schools by 14 to 27
schools were compared with control schools
TAP schools in Arizona outperformed the percentile points. Additionally, three of the
on standardized exams including the Iowa
control schools in the reading, language, and TAP schools outperformed the control
Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) and the Colorado
mathematics portions of the Stanford schools in reading/language arts by 6 to 26
Student Assessment Program (CSAP) (Com-
Achievement Test by a margin of 9 to 46 percentile points (Schacter et al., 2004).
munity Training and Assistance Center,
percentile points (Schacter et al., 2004).
2004).
REWARDING TEACHERS FOR STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE — 3
Control schools were selected from the DPS difficult settings, acceptance to take on Student achievement is measured using
school district and were matched to pilot additional responsibilities, and self- standardized tests. These tests include a
schools based on the percent of free/reduced improvement efforts will all be considered modified version of the Boem Readiness
lunch students, the percent of English lan- when determining award eligibility under Test, a South Carolina criterion-referenced
guage learners, and school size/enrollment. the revised DPS system (Gratz, 2005). test (Basic Skills Assessment Program or
BSAP), and the nationally normed Compre-
However, previous achievement of the
While ProComp has been approved by the hensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS) (Rich-
schools was not considered in the selection
DCTA and endorsed by Denver Mayor ards & Sheu, 1992).
of control schools. Unfortunately, this made
John Hickenlooper, the permanent installa-
it more difficult to detect a positive result of Overall, schools have shown improvement
tion of ProComp is contingent upon the in student performance on standardized
the pay-for-performance pilot program on
availability of funding for the program. The exams. However, student and teacher atten-
student achievement (Community Training
decision regarding the availability of fund- dance has not seen marked improvement.
and Assistance Center, 2004).
ing will be made in the fall of 2005 when Schools in the lowest socio-economic status
Pilot elementary schools’ performance on registered voters in Denver will make the bands have seen the greatest improvement
ITBS math, CSAP reading, and CSAP math decision whether or not to approve a $25 in student achievement. Schools in Band 1
tests declined over the course of the pilot million levy which would provide addi- showed significantly greater gains than
program. Control schools’ mean scores also tional revenue to fund the ProComp system Band 5 schools on the BSAP and CTBS
declined on the ITBS math test, but their (Denver Public Schools and Denver Class- standardized tests (Richards & Sheu, 1992).
mean scores increased on the CSAP writing room Teachers Association Joint Task
test. Pilot school students’ performance was Force on Teacher Compensation, 2004b;
found to be lower than the control schools’ Gratz, 2005).
students on all tests except the ITBS lan- Tennessee Value-Added Assessment
guage (Community Training and Assistance System
Center, 2004).
Through the founding of a group of business
South Carolina School Incentive
Pilot middle school students performed bet- and community leaders known as the Com-
Reward Program
ter than control school students on the ITBS munity Education Alliance (CEA) and the
reading, CSAP writing, and CSAP math Established in 1984, the South Carolina development of a teacher recruitment and
tests. Additionally, the average scores of School Incentive Reward Program (SIRP) retention plan, the city of Chattanooga has
pilot middle school students increased sig- is the longest running state-sponsored, been able to attract quality teachers to some
nificantly over time. Furthermore, the con- group-based performance plan in the nation. of the city’s lowest performing schools and
trol schools’ students experienced SIRP awards given to schools in the past significantly increase students’ performance
significant declines in mean scores on the have amounted to about $25-$40 per stu- in reading, language arts, math, science, and
ITBS and CSAP test over the course of the dent. The typical winning school receives social studies.
pilot (Community Training and Assistance between $15,000 and $20,000 (Kelley &
Utilizing the Tennessee Value-Added
Center, 2004). Odden, 1995).
Assessment System (TVAAS) as the mea-
Pilot high schools and control high schools All schools are placed in one of five com- suring stick for students’ improvement and
both experienced significant increases in parison bands based on the school’s per- teachers’ productivity allows for a more
centage of students receiving free lunches,
mean scores on most tests over the course of “level playing field” for teachers who have
percentage receiving reduced-price lunches,
the pilot. However, two pilot high schools low-achieving students. TVAAS focuses on
teachers’ average years of education beyond
students’ improvement, and allows teachers
had significantly higher increases than con-
the bachelor’s degree, and percentage of
that help previously underperforming stu-
trol high schools on several ITBS and CSAP students meeting or exceeding standardized
dents make significant learning gains during
tests. Manual High School experienced test score requirements. Schools compete
the year to receive credit for their accom-
higher performance than control schools on with other schools in the same band for
plishments (Holland & Soifer, 2004).
the ITBS language and math tests. Thomas awards (Kelley & Odden, 1995). Band 1
Jefferson High School students outper- consists of lower-performing schools with Rewards for high TVAAS scores include a
formed control high school students on the the highest percentage of students receiving $5,000 bonus for individual teachers and the
ITBS language, ITBS math, and CSAP free or reduced lunch, and Band 5 consists potential of a $2,000 bonus for every teacher
reading tests. However, they performed sig- of higher-performing schools with the low- in the school if the school receives a high
nificantly lower than control group school est percentage of students receiving free or overall TVAAS score. In addition to salary
students on the ITBS reading test (Commu- reduced lunch. bonuses, other incentives provided to teach-
nity Training and Assistance Center, 2004). A school gain index (SGI) is calculated for ers by the CEA include loans toward the
each school. Awards are based on three cri- purchase of a house in a neighborhood near
Based on the results of the pilot program,
teria: (1) student achievement, (2) teacher a low-performing school, free legal services,
DPS has addressed several issues related to attendance, and (3) student attendance. Of and free tuition toward a master’s degree in
the structure of the pay-for-performance these three criteria, student achievement urban education (Holland & Soifer, 2004).
system. These issues included how to mea-
gain is the most important measure. In order These incentives have helped reduce teacher
sure student progress across different class- to be eligible for an award, a school must
recruitment and retention problems and
rooms and schools, as well as the use of meet or exceed the minimum SGI improve-
improve student achievement at the nine
additional criteria to determine eligibility ment index based on its grouping category
schools utilizing this program. Low-per-
for awards. Additional criteria including (Richards & Sheu, 1992).
forming inner-city Chattanooga schools par-
supervisor evaluations, assignment in more
REWARDING TEACHERS FOR STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE — 4
ticipating in the TVAAS program are reading portion of the Stanford Achieve- These increases in students’ performance
increasing students’ scores on standardized ment Test (Dee & Keys, 2005). may not be entirely attributable to the imple-
tests at a more rapid rate than their suburban mentation of performance incentive pro-
Schacter et al. (2002) indicated that schools
counterparts. For example, in two years the grams. Raham (2000) notes that the
participating in the Milken Teacher
percentage of Grade 3 students reading at or performance incentive programs were com-
Advancement Program made significant
above grade level, as determined by the ponents of larger education reform efforts in
gains in student achievement on the Stanford
Terra Nova standardized test, in low-per- Texas and Kentucky. However, it is still
forming inner-city Chattanooga schools has Achievement Test.
important to note the role of performance
doubled (Holland & Soifer, 2004). The average TAP school gained between incentive programs as a factor in the
Additionally, teacher retention has increased 11.5 percent and 23 percent from 2000 to improvement of students’ academic
significantly. In the fall of 2002, there were 2002 toward their goal of scoring in the 85th achievement.
30 vacant positions at the nine schools. One percentile on the Stanford Achievement
year later only one teaching position was Test. Additionally, TAP schools showed sig-
vacant (Holland & Soifer, 2004). nificantly greater student gains than control
schools in the areas of reading, language, ALTERNATIVE COMPENSATION
and mathematics in 2001 and 2002 PROGRAMS IN INDIANA
(Schacter et al., 2002).
Since the mid-1990s, school districts in
Impact of Alternative Compensation
Furthermore, as part of statewide educa-
Indiana have taken new steps to promote the
Programs on Student Achievement
tional reform in Texas and Kentucky, perfor-
development of high-quality teachers and to
Research on the impact of performance- mance incentive programs were established. reward those teachers who take the initia-
based pay and other alternative compensa- Students in these two states demonstrated tive to earn additional licensure or advanced
tion programs has mostly focused on their marked improvement as a result of these certification. Local examples of this are the
impact on teachers (Kelley et al., 2000; reforms. From 1994 to 1998, students in work of the Anderson Federation of Teach-
Texas increased their performance on the ers and the Anderson Community School
Kelley et al., 2002; Milanowski & Hene-
Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Corporation. In 1995, these organizations
man, 2001). However, there has been some
(TAAS) math exam from approximately 50 began reimbursing teachers who success-
research regarding the impact of alternative
percent passing in 1994 to 80 percent pass- fully obtain National Board for Professional
teacher compensation on student achieve-
ing in 1998 (Raham, 2000). Students in Ken- Teaching Standards (NBPTS) certification.
ment outcomes (Dee & Keys, 2005;
tucky increased their elementary students’ Teachers in this district are also allowed five
Schacter et al., 2002; Schacter et al., 2004).
National Assessment of Educational release days to prepare for certification
Research conducted on alternative compen- Progress (NAEP) performance significantly (NCREL, 1999).
sation programs indicates increased student between 1993 and 1997. Elementary school
A second example is the contract signed in
achievement in several areas. For instance, students scoring at the proficient level on the
1997 by the Hammond Teachers’ Federation
in their study of Tennessee schools offering NAEP rose from 8 percent in 1993 to 38 per-
and the School City of Hammond allowing
merit pay for teachers, Dee and Keys (2005) cent in 1997 (Palmaffy, 1998 cited in
NBPTS certified teachers to become eligible
found that kindergarten through Grade 3 stu- Raham, 2000).
for placement in the doctoral level of their
dents of teachers in merit pay systems
scored higher on the Stanford Achievement
Test in the areas of reading and math than
students whose teachers were paid under the
Figure 1. Student Stanford Achievement Test
conventional single-salary structure.
Math and Reading Performance Increase in
Increased achievement also occurred for
Tennessee Schools offering Merit Pay
Tennessee teachers with varying degrees of
teaching experience when merit pay was 4.5%
e 4.1%
introduced (see Figure 1). Percentile score as 4.0% 3.5%
increases on the math section of the Stanford re 3.5%
c
Awcithhi epvreombeantit oTneasrt yw/aeprep grerenattiecset ftoear csthuedresn—ts ore In 23..50%% 2.4% 2.3%
those with zero to four years of teaching Sc 2.0%
etixlep esrcioenrec eg.a Sinlisg ohntl yth leo wmeart hs tsuedcetniot np eorfc ethne- entile 11..05%% 1.5% 1.5%
c
Stanford Achievement Test occured for er 0.5%
Level I teachers, generally those with five to P
0.0%
nine years of teaching experience, and Level
Math Reading
II or III teachers, generally those with 10 or
Probationary/apprentice (0-4 years of experience) Subject
more years of teaching experience. How- Level I (5-9 years of experience)
ever, students with more experienced teach- Level II or III (10 or more years of experience)
ers (Level II and Level III teachers) showed
the greatest percentile score increase on the Adapted from Dee & Keys (2005).
REWARDING TEACHERS FOR STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE — 5
salary structure or to receive an additional for certification, recruitment incentives, edu- promote collaboration among teachers.
$2,000 over what they would earn if they cational loan forgiveness, and an authoriza- Increased student achievement is another
were not NBPTS certified (NCREL, 1999). tion for school corporations to pay an annual positive impact demonstrated by schools
bonus of up to $10,000 to teachers who teach participating in the Milken TAP program
Private schools in Indiana have employed
certain secondary courses in mathematics and schools in Colorado, Tennessee, Texas,
performance-based compensation programs
and sciences (Indiana Department of Educa- and Kentucky that are utilizing an alterna-
as well. With funding from the Lilly
tion, 2004). Additionally, according to the tive teacher compensation program (Com-
Endowment, eight Catholic schools in Indi-
North Central Regional Educational Labora- munity Training and Assistance Center,
anapolis have implemented the Milken TAP
tory (n.d.), beginning in the 2005-06 school 2004; Holland & Soifer, 2004; Palmaffy,
program and have seen impressive results.
year Indiana will begin to rank its schools 1998 cited in Raham, 2000; Raham, 2000;
For example, for the first time in the
based on improvement in student perfor- Schacter et al., 2002).
school’s history, 100 percent of Grade 6 stu-
mance and is supposed to provide financial
dents at Saint Lawrence Catholic School in
incentives to schools whose students show
Indianapolis passed the math section of the
improvement, although the legislature has
ISTEP+. Saint Lawrence Catholic School Recommendations
not yet funded the awards and incentives
principal Betty Popp highlighted the posi-
program. The state of Indiana should continue to offer
tive impact of the TAP program on the
incentives to recruit and retain teachers with
teachers at her school: “I had good teachers. Indiana has not seen widespread adoption of
knowledge and skills in schools’ areas of
Now I have great teachers” (Neal, 2005). formal performance-based compensation
greatest need. The needs could include sub-
models among its public or private schools
Peggy Elson, Director of the TAP program ject area knowledge (e.g., math, science, or
and districts. However, many elements of
for the Archdiocese of Southern Indiana, is
special education) or skills and certifications
skill- or competency-based pay models are
also confident that her schools are improv-
in areas including technology or counseling.
certainly present in school districts across
ing due to the implementation of the TAP
These incentives could also be utilized to
program. Through the professional growth the state.
attract teachers to hard-to-staff schools.
component of the program, “teachers are
Additionally, professional development
improving their techniques,” Elson stated
funding for credentials such as NBPTS cer-
(Personal Communication, April 21, 2005).
tification should be continued.
However, the cost of the TAP program may
prohibit its continuation. In 2006, funding CONCLUSIONS AND
from the Lilly Endowment grant will end,
RECOMMENDATIONS
but with the positive outcomes, administra-
Conclusion:
tors are convinced the Archdiocese of School districts in areas across the nation
Southern Indiana will be able to locate other are in various stages of the development
A broad range of stakeholders must
sources of funding for the program. and implementation of alternative teacher
be considered in the development of
At the state level, the Indiana General compensation programs. Many of these
an alternative compensation program
Assembly has passed legislation including programs include some aspect of student
opportunities for teachers to obtain finan- achievement as an indicator of effective Consideration of a school’s climate is
cial support while seeking NBPTS certifica- teaching. States including California, Min- important in the design and development of
tion. Indiana Public Law 221 established a nesota, Iowa, Ohio, Colorado, Kentucky, an alternative compensation program. All
grant system through the Indiana Depart- North Carolina, Tennessee, and South stakeholders, including teachers, adminis-
ment of Education to fund school improve- Carolina have seen the adoption of alterna- trators, and staff, must be considered in this
ment plans, including professional tive teacher compensation programs with process. Additionally, certain elements of
development for teachers (NBPTS, n.d.). In varying degrees of success. There are sev- the program must be clearly articulated. For
addition to the grant system established by eral things that can be learned from these example, evaluation of a teacher’s perfor-
P.L. 221, the fiscal year 2002-03 state bud- states’ experience with alternative teacher mance is an extremely important aspect to
get allocated $20,500,000 for professional compensation programs. consider. Performance indicators must be
development and a new teacher induction established and agreed upon by all stake-
program administered by the Indiana Pro- holders. If these elements are not consid-
fessional Standards Board. This included
ered, it may have an unintended detrimental
$250,000 for NBPTS certification and
impact on the school’s climate. Instead of
Conclusion:
$16,250,000 for professional development
fostering a collaborative climate, a competi-
grants under Indiana Code 20-1-1-6.5 (Indi-
tive climate may emerge.
ana Department of Education, 2001). The Alternative teacher compensation
annual state appropriation for teacher pro- programs can be effective tools for
fessional development during the 2005-07 improving teaching
biennium is $13,812,500 (Indiana General Recommendations
When carefully developed and imple-
Assembly, 2005).
mented, teacher compensation programs School districts interested in developing an
Legislation proposed, but not passing, during
can provide incentives for teachers to alternative compensation program for their
the 2003 and 2004 sessions of the Indiana
broaden their knowledge, skills, and teachers should spend a significant amount
General Assembly included several teacher
responsibilities. These programs can also of time collecting information and develop-
compensation issues, including incentives
REWARDING TEACHERS FOR STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE — 6
ing a plan. All stakeholders must be consid- Kelley, C., Odden, A., Milanowski, A., & Hen-
ered in the development of this plan. This REFERENCES eman, H. (2000). The motivational effects of
school-based performance awards. Philadel-
can help to increase support from school
phia: University of Pennsylvania Consor-
personnel, as well as foster a collaborative Community Training and Assistance Center. tium for Policy Research in Education.
(2004). Catalyst for change: Pay for perfor-
school environment. Kelley, C., Heneman, H., & Milanowski, A.
mance in Denver Final Report. Boston, MA:
(2002). Teacher motivation and school-
Author. Retrieved May 10, 2005, from http:// based performance awards. Educational
www.ctacusa.com/denver-vol3-final.pdf Administration Quarterly, 38(3), 372-401.
Dee, T.S., & Keys, B.J. (2005). Dollars and Milanowski, A.T., & Heneman, H.G. (2001).
Conclusion: sense: What a Tennessee experiment tells us Assessment of teacher reactions to a stan-
about merit pay. Education Next, 5(1), 60- dards-based teacher evaluation system: A
67. pilot study. Journal of Personnel Evaluation
Further research is necessary regard- Denver Public Schools and Denver Classroom in Education, 15(3), 193-212.
ing compensation programs’ impact Teachers Association Joint Task Force on National Association of State Boards of Educa-
on student achievement. Teacher Compensation. (2004a). Facts tion. (2002). Statewide teacher career ladder.
about ProComp. Denver, CO: Author. NASBE Policy Update, 10(9). Retrieved
Retrieved May 24, 2005, from http://denver- June 7, 2004, from http://www.nasbe.org/
While the research in this area suggests that pfp.org/denverteachercompensation/ Educational_Issues/New_Information/
alternative teacher compensation programs index.html Policy_Updates/10_09.html
increase student achievement, further Denver Public Schools and Denver Classroom National Board for Professional Teaching Stan-
Teachers Association Joint Task Force on dards. (n.d.). State & local support & incen-
inquiry is needed in this area. The positive Teacher Compensation. (2004b). Task force tives: Indiana state action. Retrieved June 7,
gains experienced by students should not be news. Denver, CO: Author. Retrieved June 6, 2004, from http://www.nbpts.org/about/
2005, from http://www.denverpfp.org/den-
overlooked. However, to add to the knowl- stateinfo.cfm?state=Indiana
verteachercompensation/
edge in this area, achievement measures Joint%20Task%20Force%20on%20Teacher Notrotrhy .C (e1n9t9ra9l) .R Tehgei ocnoanld Eitdiouncsa toiof nteaal cLhaibnogr aan-d
other than standardized tests should be %20Compensation_News.html learning in Indiana: A policy inventory.
examined to help determine the actual Denver Public Schools. (2004). Professional Naperville, IL. Retrieved June 7, 2004, from
impact of alternative teacher compensation compensation system for teachers. Retrieved http://www.in.gov/psb/visitors/Condition-
June 7, 2004, from http://denverpfp.org/den-
sOfTeachingAndLearning.pdf
programs on student achievement. verteachercompensation/index.html.
North Central Regional Educational Labora-
Dixon, D.N., Graham, B.M., & Dungan, D.E. tory. (n.d.). Key issues in Indiana: Account-
(2002). Indiana State Teachers Association ability/standards. Retrieved June 7, 2004,
Teacher Compensation Study. Indianapolis, from http://www.ncrel.org/info/press/indi-
IN: Indiana State Teachers Association.
ana.htm
Recommendations Retrieved June 7, 2004, from http:// Neal, A. (March 1, 2005). Merit pay for teach-
www.ista-in.org/content/documents/ ers deserves a fair chance in Indiana. Fort
Research should be conducted on Indiana teacher_compensation_study.pdf Wayne Journal Gazette. Retrieved March 23,
schools utilizing alternative teacher com- Education Commission of the States. (2001). 2005, from www.fortwayne.com/mld/journ-
Pay-for-performance: Key questions and
algazette/news/editorial/11020938htm
pensation programs, including the Milken lessons from five current models. Denver, Nelson, F.H., & Drown, R. (2003). Survey and
Teacher Advancement Program. While CO: Education Commission of the States. analysis of teacher salary trends 2002.
national research in this area exists, there is Retrieved June 7, 2004, from http://www. Washington, DC: American Federation of
ecs.org/clearinghouse/28/30/2830.pdf Teachers. Retrieved June 7, 2004, from http:/
little, if any, research on alternative com- Goorian, B. (2000). Alternative teacher com- /www.aft.org/research/survey02/Table_III-
pensation programs in the state of Indiana. pensation (ERIC Digest Number 142). 1.pdf
Research in this area could yield important Gratz, D.B. (2005). Lessons from Denver: The Odden, A. (2000). New and better forms of
information for Indiana education policy- pay for performance pilot. Phi Delta Kap- teacher compensation are possible. Phi
pan, 86(8), 569-581. Delta Kappan, 81(5), 361-366.
makers and lead to improvements in teach- Hatry, H.P., Greiner, J.M., & Ashford, B.G. Plauny, L. (1992). Compared to what? Devel-
ing quality and student achievement. (1994). Issues and case studies in teacher oping a teacher compensation comparison
incentive plans (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: standard. School Business Affairs, 58(8), 16-
The Urban Institute. 20.
Holland, R., & Soifer, D. (2004). Good ideas: Raham, H. (2000). Cooperative performance
Six valuable state and local education incentive plans. Peabody Journal of Educa-
reforms. The Lexington Institute Alexandria, tion, 75(4), 142-158.
VA. Retrieved June 7, 2004, from http:// Richards, C.E., & Sheu, T.M. (1992). The
www.lexingtoninstitute.org/education/ South Carolina school incentive reward pro-
GoodIdeas.pdf gram: A policy analysis. Economics of Edu-
Indiana Department of Education. (2001). cation Review, 11(1), 71-86.
AUTHORS House Enrolled Act 1001 - 2001-03 State
Schacter, J., Schiff, T., Thum, Y.M., Fagnano,
Budget. Legislative Bulletin. Retrieved June
C., Bendotti, M., Solmon, L., Firetag, K., &
Jonathan A. Plucker 7, 2004, from http://doe.state.in.us/leg- Milken, L. (2002). The impact of the Teacher
[email protected] is Director of the watch/2001/finalbudget.html Advancement Program on student achieve-
Center for Evaluation and Education Policy Indiana Department of Education. (2004). 2004 ment, teacher attitudes, and job satisfaction.
Legislative Bulletin. Retrieved June 7, 2004, Santa Monica, CA: Milken Family Founda-
Jason S. Zapf from http://doe.state.in.us/legwatch/wel- tion.
come.html
[email protected] is a Graduate Assistant Schacter, J., Thum, Y.M., Reifsneider, D., &
at the Center for Evaluation and Education Indiana General Assembly. (2005). House Schiff, T. (2004). The teacher advancement
Policy Enrolled Act No. 1001. Indianapolis, IN: program report two: Year three results from
Author. Retrieved May 9, 2005, from http://
Arizona and year one results from South
www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2005/PDF/HE/ Carolina TAP schools. Santa Monica, CA:
Sarah A. McNabb HE1001.1.pdf Milken Family Foundation.
[email protected] is a Graduate Kelley, C., & Odden, A. (1995). Reinventing
Assistant at the Center for Evaluation and teacher compensation systems. Madison,
Education Policy WI: University of Wisconsin Consortium for
Policy Research in Education.
REWARDING TEACHERS FOR STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE — 7
WEB RESOURCES
Consortium for Policy Research in Education: Teacher Compensation
http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/cpre/tcomp/related/papers/index.asp

Denver Public Schools Professional Compensation System for Teachers
http://denverprocomp.org/

Education Commission of the States: Teaching Quality - Compensation
http://www.ecs.org/html/issue.asp?issueid=129&subIssueID=78

Milken Family Foundation Teacher Advancement Program
http://www.mff.org/tap/tap.taf

More about the Center for Evaluation & Education Policy
and our publications can be found at our web site:
http://ceep.indiana.edu
yciloP noitacudE dna noitaulavE rof retneC eht yb dehsilbup era sfeirB yciloP noitacudE
smargorP noitasnepmoC rehcaeT evitanretlA hguorht gnihcaeT gnivorpmI
ecnamrofreP ’stnedutS rof srehcaeT gnidraweR
8344.558.218
4563-10474 NI ,notgnimoolB
teertS drihT tsaE 905
ytisrevinU anaidnI