Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Student Growth Measures in Policy and Practice pp 29–47Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

When Theoretical Models Meet School Realities: Educator Responses to Student Growth Measures in an Incentive Pay Program

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Efforts to improve human capital often pivot on the availability of valid, clear, credible, and fair measures of educator performance. While existing literature deals with the technical properties associated with student growth models, little research examines how educators interpret and respond to them. Grounded in measurement and expectancy theories, this paper uses data from a multi-year, mixed-methods study to examine how educators responded to student growth models in the context of a pay-for-performance program where significant rewards were based on these measures. The study demonstrates the difficulty of developing measures that, in the minds of educators, are valid, clear, credible, and fair. It underscores the importance of addressing the unintended consequences that may occur when high stakes get attached to these measures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ahn, T., & Vigdor, J. (2010, June). The impact of incentives on effort: Teacher bonuses in North Carolina. Paper presented at the Program on Education Policy and Governance (PEPG) conference at Harvard Kennedy School, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from http://www.hks.harvard.edu/pepg/MeritPayPapers/Ahn_10-06.pdf

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (1999). The standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amrein-Beardsley, A. (2008). Methodological concerns about the education value-added assessment system. Educational Researcher, 37(2), 65–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N. (2011, February 8). Researchers fault L.A. Times methods in analysis of Calif. teachers, The Washington Post, p. A9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, E. L., Barton, P. E., Darling-Hammond, L., Haertel, E., Ladd, H. F., Linn, R. L., et al. (2010). Problems with the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballou, D., Sanders, W., & Wright, P. (2004). Controlling for student background in value-added assessment of teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 37–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. (1952). Welfare economics and the theory of the state. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran, S. P. (2010). Can teachers be evaluated by their students’ test scores? Should they be? The use of value-added measures of teacher effectiveness in policy and practice. Education Policy for Action Series. Providence, R.I.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) (1996). Interstate school leaders licensure consortium: Standards for school leaders. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figlio, D., & Ladd, H. (2015). School accountability and student achievement. In H. Ladd & M. Goertz (Eds.), Handbook on research in education finance and policy (pp. 194–210). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, C. M., Reckase, M. D., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2015). Can value added measures of teacher performance be trusted? Education Finance and Policy, 10(1), 117–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, D., & Sass, T. (2009, September). What makes for a good teacher and who can tell? (Working Paper No. 30). Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research [CALDER]. Retrieved from www.urban.org/…/1001431-what-makes-for-a-good-teacher.pdf

  • Hatry, H. P., Greiner, J. M., & Ashford, B. G. (1994). Issues and case studies in teacher incentive plans (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heneman III, H. G. (1998). Assessment of the motivational reactions of teachers to a school-based performance award program. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12(1), 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herman, J. L., & Baker, E. (2010). Assessment policy: Making sense of the Babel. In E. Baker, B. McGraw, & P. Peterson (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education research (pp. 176–190). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, J. Y., Sporte, S. E., & Luppescu, S. (2015). Teacher perspectives on evaluation reform: Chicago’s REACH students. Educational Researcher, 44(2), 105–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, S. M. (2015). Will VAMs reinforce the walls of the egg-crate school? Educational Researcher, 44(2), 117–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koedel, C. (2009). An empirical analysis of teacher spillover effects in secondary school. Economics of Education Review, 28(2009), 682–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konstantopoulos, S., & Chung, V. (2011). The persistence of teacher effects in elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 361–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koretz, D. (2008). Measuring up: What educational testing really tells us. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavy, V. (2007). Using performance-based pay to improve the quality of teachers. The Future of Children, 17(1), 87–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malen, B., Rice, J.K., Jackson, C., Hoyer, K.H., Hyde, L., Bivona, L., et al. (2011). Implementation, payouts, and perceived effects: A formative analysis of Financial Incentive Rewards for Supervisors and Teachers (FIRST). Prince George’s County, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malen, B, Rice, J. K., Bauman, P., Beaner, T., Chen, E., Dougherty, A., et al. (2009). Building the plane in flight: A formative evaluation of Financial Incentive Awards for Supervisors and Teachers (FIRST). Prince George’s County, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCaffrey, D. F., Lockwood, J. R., Koretz, D., Louis, T. A., & Hamilton, L. (2004). Models for value-added modeling of teacher effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29(1), 67–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCaffrey, D., Lockwood, J., Koretz, D., Louis, T.A., & Hamilton, L. (2003). Evaluating value-added models for teacher accountability. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG158.pdf

  • Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. T. (1980). Getting the facts: A fieldwork guide for evaluators and policy analysts. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odden, A., Kelley, C., Heneman, H., & Milanowski, A. (2001). Enhancing teacher quality through knowledge and skills-based pay. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved from http://cpre.wceruw.org/publications/rb34.pdf

  • Rice, J. K., Malen, B., Jackson, C., & Hoyer, K. M. (2015). Time to pay up: Analyzing the motivational potential of financial awards in a TIF program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39(1), 29–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, J. K., Roellke, C. F., Sparks, D., & Kolbe, T. (2009). Piecing together the teacher policy landscape: A policy-problem typology. Teachers College Record, 111(2), 511–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, J, & Mathis, W. J. (2013, January). Reviews of two culminating reports from the MET project. Boulder, CO: National Education Policy Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, W. L., & Horn, S. P. (1994). The Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS): Mixed-model methodology in educational assessment. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 8(3), 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawchuk, S. (2011, February 2). Wanted: Ways to measure most teachers. Education Week, pp. 1, 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schensul, J. J., LeCompte, M., Nastasi, B. K., & Borgatti, S. P. (1999). Enhanced ethnographic methods. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, S. D. (2011, April, 6). Study flags challenges in growth accountability models. Education Week, p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Springer, M., Podgursky, M., Lewis, J., Ehlert, M., Ghosh-Dastidar, B., Gronberg, T., et al. (2008). Texas Educator Excellence Grant (TEEG) Program: Year two evaluation. Austin, TX: Texas Education Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Education (2012). Teacher incentive fund: First implementation report, 2006 and 2007 Grantees. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valli, L., Croninger, R., & Walters, K. (2007). Who (else) is the teacher? Cautionary notes on teacher accountability systems. American Journal of Education, 113(4), 635–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yettick, H. (2014, May 21). Researchers advise caution on value-added models, Education Week, pp. 10–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K., Le, V., McCaffrey, D. F., Marsh, J. A., Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., et al. (2013). Incentive pay programs do not affect teacher motivation or reported practices: Results from three randomized studies. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

    Jennifer King Rice & Betty Malen

Authors
  1. Jennifer King Rice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Betty Malen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, North Carolina, USA

    Kimberly Kappler Hewitt

  2. Arizona State University , Tempe, Arizona, USA

    Audrey Amrein-Beardsley

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rice, J.K., Malen, B. (2016). When Theoretical Models Meet School Realities: Educator Responses to Student Growth Measures in an Incentive Pay Program. In: Kappler Hewitt, K., Amrein-Beardsley, A. (eds) Student Growth Measures in Policy and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-53901-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-53901-4_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-53900-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-53901-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation