Study pours cold water on performance-based teacher pay

One of the most intensely debated aspects of President Obama's "Race to the Top" fund for education, especially here in California, has been its insistence on a mechanism that would allow for teacher evaluations based on the performance of their students. It's a no-brainer as far as a lot of people are concerned, but teachers unions abhor it and California law specifically forbids linking teachers with student achievement, at least at the state level.

Now comes some interesting, and perhaps counterintuitive, news from Portugal, where the government recently began tying teacher pay to student achievement. A study released in May (and brought to our attention today by the Public Education Network) contains this stunner of a conclusion: "Overall, our results consistently indicate that the increased focus on individual teacher performance caused a sizable and statistically significant decline in student achievement."

That's right, students did worse when teacher pay was based on their performance. Go figure.

The study, by the Institute for the Study of Labor in Bonn, Germany, does contain solace for supporters of performance-based pay. Simply put, the Portuguese system might not be the best example of how to put together such a system, and the authors acknowledge that "teacher incentives ... may improve student achievement" if done well.

--Mitchell Landsberg

Comments

[Paul]

Yeah, maybe they should pay cops and firefighters according to crime and fires in their district. This is baloney. You'll never get teachers to teach in the inner cities with a program like that. Lets face it smart kids come from smart parents. Not dumb teachers.

[Aaron]

I'm not a teacher, but I'm against this type of proposal. Sure, it makes for great talking points, but why would a teacher decide to teach in South LA where the drop-out rate is over 50%, kids are bringing guns to school and living in broken homes -- for LESS pay than teaching at a nice, mostly white/rich school in Laguna Beach where the kids have literally every advantage at their disposal?

[NaroNaro]

Maybe Portugal would like to consider the "No Child Left Behind" Program from our previous Pres.

Look that's Portugal, this is the US. Who conducted the study? IFSL based in Bonne, Germany. Ok let me try this again.

We are comparing a proposed "US" Program to a program in "Portugal" based on a study by groups from "Germany"? Someone is really reaching in the bag. Let me know if you see a magic rabbit in that hat!

[abc123]

The hand-wringing on this issue is ridiculous.

Teacher pay can easily be based upon student performance IMPROVEMENT, not absolute performance. Test the kids at the beginning of the year, test again at the end. Take the difference between the scores. In this way, a teacher is not punished for teaching disadvantaged students. It ain't rocket science.

And Paul, firefighters and police do indeed use performance metrics to determine advancement and pay.

[Joseph]

I personally think is wrong. Why? The student performance is closely tight to the parents own background. For example, where are the best public schools in Mass. Yep! you got it follow the money and the level of education of the parents and you will find them. Similar story with California...see ya' near Coopertino. get the point! So not sure how you expect the students from Los Angeles, CA to perform in the same manner the students from Newton, MA. For every rule there are exceptions, but we are talking about the overall results.

[Joseph]

I personally think is wrong. Why? The student performance is closely tight to the parents own background. For example, where are the best public schools in Mass. Yep! you got it follow the money and the level of education of the parents and you will find them. Similar story with California...see ya' near Coopertino. get the point! So not sure how you expect the students from Los Angeles, CA to perform in the same manner the students from Newton, MA. For every rule there are exceptions, but we are talking about the overall results.

[David Sackman]

The basic premise of performance-based teacher pay, as well as the "No Child Left Educated" program, is flawed. That premise is that student "performance" can be measured by tests. We are raising a damaged generation on this premise that life is a test - if you just memorize the "answers" and spit them back at the proper time, you will "pass." These students (and I see this in the college classes I teach) are helpless when asked to solve a problem or think for themselves. If we want a nation of robots, this program is the way. But I say to think for yourself, and question every so-called "answer."

[julia dewey]

A teacher isn't a factory worker with a product to produce. She or he has the child for only 6 hours a day or in highschool 1 hour. That child goes home to an environment that a teacher can't control. Noise, confusion, tv, no supervision, all of that is beyond our control. Or, comfort, support, inspiring parents, good examples. So, a teacher with a class full of the later has an amazing advantage over a teacher with the former. It's like saying that we pay the police for the amount of crime that doesn't happen. If there isn't any crime in there area then high pay. Of course, who would want to work in the tough gang ridden neighborhoods. And who would want to teach there either? It isn't a fair system nor is it realistic and it will take all the best and brightest away from the student who need them the most.

[Erin]

In response to abc123's comment, tying teacher pay to performance improvement is no better than tying it to overall performance - both create structural disincentives to work with particular cohorts of students. If my pay is tied to overall performance, then I have a disincentive to work with students who struggle academically. If my pay is tied to improvement, then I have a disincentive to work with students who are in accelerated programs because they will already be "maxed out" in terms of their CST classification (if you've already reached the "proficient" or "advanced" classification before you ever landed in my class, how are you going to get me my "student improvement" merit bonus?).

Both systems are flawed, and not in the best interest of children. Furthermore, both are predicated on the notion that filling in bubbles is the best way to determine what students have learned, and also what teachers do for children every day. Where is the bubble my student fills in that shows I helped her find counseling services after she was raped? Where is the bubble my student fills in after I notice his bruises and call CPS? Where is the bubble my student fills in when I am the only adult who looks him in the eye and smiles when I see him that day?

Teaching is not simply the transmission of facts into an empty receptacle. It is no surprise to me that student performance dips when teachers are encouraged to stop looking at their students as human beings and start looking at them as ATM machines.

[MVB]

School districts are currently working the system to keep the scores up across the board - focusing intently on the material that shows up most on the test. For those outside of education, the State has adopted standards and released information about which standards will be tested most intensely. Districts have narrowed the curriculum to just those areas. Congratulations 2+2 is on the test more often than 3+3, so don't ask your kid the 3+3 question becuase they won't know it. When the "value-added" model is adopted, teachers will encourage their kids to do poorly in the beginning of the year and will offer extra-credit for the end of the year test. The testing companies love the "value-added" model. They'll double their contracts which is hundreds of millions of dollars in California. The only real solution is to throw out the tests and find a better way to judge growth.

[Sanford Gordon]

For 35 years since the Collective Bargaining Agreement came into being, the LAUSD Drop out rate has increased to where it is today and that figure is about 37.5% or over 1/3 of the potential number of students. The common fiber is a Teacher or a Teacher who shows up to teach or a Teacher who shows up to qualify for getting Paid. The only true way to judge sucess is "PERFORMANCE" and when you have
performance you have results and without it you "MEDIOCRITY"
and that is why the Teachers Union is steadfastly against performance incentatives for it would put the SPOTLIGHT on the non performers in the system. Portagual and what does that have to do with the United States Educational System?
This is an example of searching for something no matter the validity to justify doing nothing and keeping the failing system going!!!!! A. J. Duffy is not about Performance only corruption and that is why today you have over 150 teachers (The worse of the worse) sitting at desks collecting pay in excess of between 6 months to over 2years because their performance was so bad that the Principals finally could take it no more. No prinicipal wants to let a non performing teacher go because it takes so much time, energy and at no time is the question on the table is the teacher who is being fired, a performing teacher and that is the reason there are so many bad teachers in the system and that they will fight the Performance incentative and the losers are the "CHILDREN"! The losers are society for the more inadequatly trained or educated cost the taxpayers a great deal! Think About it.

[Rick Roll]

Sanford Gordon you are ignorant of the realities of the classroom.

1) School scores do not judge how much students have improved. They compare 2008 8th graders versus 2009 8th graders. This is statistically useless as the two groups are DIFFERENT!

2) The common thread is low performing schools is A) HIGH POVERTY RATE B) HIGH PERCENTAGE OF NON-ENGLISH SPEAKERS C) LACK OF PARENTAL EDUCATION D) DISPARATE FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS BASED ON LOCAL TAX BASE E) INEXPERIENCED TEACHERS/HIGH TEACHER TURNOVER RATE

3) Mediocrity is mandated by NCLB as schools are rewarded very little credit for moving a child from P to A status and only focuses on FBB and BB improvements (since you are such an expert you already know what that means)

4) There are over 150 teachers sitting around doing nothing BECAUSE THE DISTRICT REFUSES TO FIRE THEM AND AT THE SAME TIME REFUSES TO LET THEM WORK. Tell the Board to make a decision.

5) The only loser around here is you. You fail to grasp any of the simplest ideas of education and you continue to proclaim your ignorance. Wallow is your ignorance but don't drag everyone else down into your own mud.

[Dan Basalone]

The current evaluation system for teachers is a waste of administrative time. Why aren't lesson plans evaluated...in my experience, a teacher who couldn't plan units of work that were meaningful and child centered,couldn't teach. What happened to authentic assessments like portfolios and samples of student work throughout the year? What happened to a three year probation period for new teachers to see if they really could teach within the three year period? What happened to the progressive evaluation system that was in place in LAUSD thirty years ago where teachers could see year to year improvement as well? And by the way, with teachers able to grieve every aspect of evaluation, there are more protections than accountability.

[Curtis M. Booth]

If anyone in the united states thinks linking teacher pay to student achievement is the right way to go email me and i will personally invite you to spend a week in my classes. I guarantee you will change your mind and thank meand every other teacher you meet for the jobs we do

[sally]

I think if a teacher really wants to be a great teacher she or he will take the challenge to prove how great they are and show everyone how they can have children achieve and no one else could! The problem with teachers they are not competitive like sales people and they are not pushers! You have to taech like a salesman sells with excitement and self confidence. I have never met a teacher with the energy that sales people have they are like the average government worker!Boring!