thebroadfoundations pay for performance pace conference oakland and los angeles, ca march 2009

thebroadfoundations

PAY FOR PERFORMANCE

PACE ConferenceOakland and Los Angeles, CA

March 2009

2thebroadfoundations

PAY


DIFFERENTIALPAY


PAY for PERFORMANCE


What is wrong with the current system?

• Traditional pay systems do not reward educators for results.

• Traditional compensation programs that pay extra for degrees, credits and professional development do not necessarily result in improvements in student achievement.

• Providing compensation based on tenure restricts the ability of a district to use compensation to attract and retain talent.


Early and mid-career teachers are over 10x more likely to leave the district than late career teachers, yet the lion’s share of compensation is focused on late career teachers.

6

Source: Denver Public Schools

1 in 5 teachers leave



Years 0-5 Years 6-11 Years 12+

Odds that a teacher will leave the district


How can pay for performance help?

•Pay for performance can be an important lever in

improving teacher effectiveness.

• Linking educator pay to student performance can

attract, motivate, reward and retain the most

effective teachers.

•By rewarding and retaining the most effective teachers, we can accelerate the improvement in student achievement even more.


Are teachers really motivated by M O N E Y?

• “Compensation” and recognition for a job well done comes in many forms, and not all of them are green.

• Compensation policies impact employee behaviors, practices and expectations, and have a direct connection to the norms and culture of those organizations.

• A new generation of teachers are interested in

tying a portion of their compensation to quantifiable results.

• P4P has the potential to transform the K-12 education labor market.

• A number of pioneering school systems and teacher unions are leading the way – and their teachers are embracing pay for results in significant numbers.


The Broad Foundation’s investments in P4P

• Denver

• Teacher Advancement Program (Minneapolis and Chicago)

• New York City

• Houston


TBF Grants to Date: Program Descriptions

Grant Program Descriptions

Denver

• Max Award: $7,500• All new teachers participate; experienced

teachers opt-in• Provides rewards for student achievement, PD

and teaching at hard to staff schools• Funded by local tax levy

TAP • Max Award: $2,500• Schools must vote to participate in the program• Awards earned based on student achievement

and for results on a professional evaluation. A career ladder and an embedded PD model are also part of the program, as is pay for “master” and mentor teachers.

• Funded by district and state funds


TBF Grants to Date: Program Descriptions

Grant Program Descriptions

Houston

• Max Award: $8,600• All teachers in the district participate• Rewards teachers for increasing student

achievement (classroom & school wide)• Funded by board resolution that ties salary

increases to P4P funding commitment

NYC • Max Award: $5,000• Challenged schools can apply to participate;

plan is to expand to entire system• Rewards are allocated based on school-wide

performance• Funded by district and philanthropic funds


TBF Grants to Date: Results

Grant Results

Denver

• Established permanent local funding• More than 1/3 of teachers have opted-in to the system and all new teachers automatically participate

• DPS uses its new pay system as a recruiting tool.

• DPS has grown student achievement results faster than the state for most grade levels

TAP • TAP implemented in over 20% of Minneapolis Public schools; other alternative compensation programs cover over 80% of teachers in the district

• High levels of teacher approval of the program• Early data shows TAP schools in Minneapolis

out-performing comparison schools in improving student achievement


TBF Grants to Date: Results

Grant Results

Houston • HISD increased applicants per open position by 15 applicants per position since the inception of the P4P program

• HISD outperforms 100% of comparison groups in increasing achievement since the inception of the program

NYC • Applications for teachers at schools participating in the bonus program exceeded applications to comparable schools by 50%

• Early student achievement data inconclusive


Critical Program Design Elements

Design Element

Productive Optimal

Participation

Teachers at high need schools are rewarded with bonuses.

All teachers in the district are eligible for bonuses.

Group vs. Individual Awards

Teachers are rewarded for the academic results produced at their school.

Teachers of tested subjects are rewarded based on the results produced in their classroom.

Teacher Evaluation

Rewards based on a professional evaluation are offered even if they are not predictors of academic results.

Bonuses are based on ability to improve academic achievement and rating from professional evaluation matches rating from academic achievement.



Design Element

Productive Optimal

Size of Bonuses

Maximum bonus at least 10% of base salary.

Maximum bonus equal to 20% or more of base salary.

Distribution of Bonuses

Bonuses are not offered to teachers who do not demonstrate growth in student achievement.

Bonuses for the top 5-15% are twice those of average performers.

Bonuses are not offered to teachers who do not demonstrate growth.

Changes to Step and Lane System

Some base salary increases based on degrees and credits.

Salary increases only offered to those who produce results.

No pay increases for degrees and credits.



Design Element

Productive Optimal

Differential Pay for Hard to Staff Subjects and Schools

Up front “placement” incentive of more than 10% of annual salary for the first three years.

These placements should be based on teacher effectiveness data whenever possible.

Back end “results” incentives of 20% or more of annual salary for demonstrating results in the hard-to-staff subject or school.

These hard-to-staff incentives should be higher than incentives for regular schools, but need to be tied to a “trigger ratio” to determine when a subject or school is no longer categorized as hard-to-staff.


Commitment• District, school board and union leadership must

embrace the program as a central element of the district improvement strategy

Communications• District determines non-negotiable elements of the

program, but involves the union early on in design and implementation roll out

• Teachers receive significant information and training regarding the design of the program and their bonus potential

Data• Bonuses are determined by a statistical methodology

that is clear, credible and transparent

Facets of a Successful P4P Implementation


Attracting and Retaining Talent• Data from the P4P program is utilized to make

decisions regarding recruitment, selection, retention, promotion remediation and removal of teachers

Financial Sustainability• A set-aside pool of funds (tax levy, compensation pool

carve out) is established that is dedicated to P4P

Continuous Improvement• Acknowledge that we are in the early innings of

paying educators for results and be open to modifying and improving the program based on results, an independent evaluation and teacher feedback

Facets of a Successful P4P Implementation


DISCUSSION

thebroadfoundations pay for performance pace conference oakland and los angeles, ca march 2009

Documents