1 / 18

HISD Teacher Performance-Pay Models

HISD Teacher Performance-Pay Models. HISD. DISCUSSION JANUARY 2006. HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. BACKGROUND : Teacher Performance Pay. HISD has had a system of performance pay based on indicators since 2000 – 2001.

regan-kline
Download Presentation

HISD Teacher Performance-Pay Models

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HISD Teacher Performance-Pay Models HISD DISCUSSION JANUARY 2006 HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

  2. BACKGROUND: Teacher Performance Pay • HISD has had a system of performance pay based on indicators since 2000–2001. • 2004–2005 performance pay ranged from $450 to $1,000 per teacher. • Previous models based on accountability ratings and overall campus performance. • Previous models compared all campuses without consideration of demographics.

  3. GOALS OFNew Performance-Pay Models • Build upon previous success • Have a focus on and be driven by student performance results—specifically growth in student learning • Allow for campus and individual teacher performance • Provide for comparable and fair comparisons—“levels the playing field” • Ensure all teachers are included • Make model more financially meaningful

  4. ASSUMPTIONS OFTeacher Performance-Pay Models • Performance pay drives academic performance. • Performance pay based on individual teacher performance is important because good teaching occurs in all schools. • Important to recognize the value of teamwork. • A system that rewards individual performance and teamwork is best. • A competitive base salary remains a priority and will not be replaced by performance pay. • Dynamic system that will evolve over time.

  5. GENERAL OVERVIEW OFTeacher Performance-Pay Models Strand I: Campus-Level Performance (TAKS) • PART A: • All Teaching Faculty(TEA Accountability & Comparable Improvement) • PART B: • Non-Instructional Staff(TEA Accountability & Comparable Improvement)

  6. GENERAL OVERVIEW OFTeacher Performance-Pay Models Strand II:Individual Teacher Performance (Stanford 10/Aprenda 3) • PART A • Elementary Core Teachers(Complete Battery NCE) • Secondary Core Teachers(Subject-Area NCE) • PART B • Non-Core Teachers Campus-Level Improvement(Complete Battery NCE)

  7. GENERAL OVERVIEW OFTeacher Performance-Pay Models Strand III: Individual Teacher Performance (TAKS) • PART A: • Elementary Core Teachers by Grade(Improvement in Reading and Math Scale Scores) • Secondary Core Teachers(Improvement in Subject-Area Scale Scores)

  8. GENERAL OVERVIEW OFTeacher Performance-Pay Models Strand III: Individual Teacher Performance (TAKS) • PART B: • Grade 3 Current Year TAKS Performance(Reading and Math Scale Scores) • Grade 5 Current Year TAKS Performance(Science Scale Scores) • Grade 8 Current Year TAKS Performance(Social Studies Scale Scores) • Grade 10 Current Year TAKS Performance(Social Studies and Science Scale Scores)

  9. TEA Campus Account-ability Rating Campus TAKS Performance Quartiles Based on TEA Comparable Improvement* (Similar Students) Quartile 1 Quartile 2 Quartile 3 Quartile 4 Math Reading Math Reading Math Reading Math Reading Eligible to Participate** $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 Not Eligible to Partici-pate*** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Strand I A: All Teaching Faculty Campus-Level Performance Based on TAKS Math & Reading EXAMPLE * Change in TAKS performance compared to 40 schools statewide that are demographically most similar to the target school. ** Eligible to Participate = Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable with Progress (progress must be equal or greater than progress made by the district) *** Not Eligible to Participate = Acceptable without Progress, Unacceptable

  10. Strand I B: All Non-Instructional Staff Campus-Level Performance Based on TAKS Math & Reading EXAMPLE * Change in TAKS performance compared to 40 schools statewide that are demographically most similar to the target school. ** Eligible to Participate = Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable with Progress (progress must be equal or greater than progress made by the district) *** Not Eligible to Participate = Acceptable without Progress, Unacceptable

  11. $1,000 $500 0 0 $1,000 $500 0 0 $1,000 $500 0 0 $1,000 $500 0 0 EXAMPLE Strand II A: Individual Core Teacher Performance Based on Stanford 10/Aprenda 3 (NCE) HISD Comparable Improvement Groups based on percent of economically disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort* Instructional Cohort Performance Quartiles on Stanford/Aprenda* (Complete Battery for Elementary/Subject Area for Secondary) Quartile 1** Quartile 2** Quartile 3 Quartile 4 Complete Battery or Subject Area Complete Battery or Subject Area Complete Battery or Subject Area Complete Battery or Subject Area Comparable Group 1 Comparable Group 2 Comparable Group 3 Comparable Group 4 * Instructional Cohort consists of the current students in a classroom with two years of data. ** Must show positive improvement to receive incentive.

  12. Comparable Improvement Groups based on percent of economically disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort Campus Cohort Performance Quartiles on Stanford/Aprenda* (Complete Battery) HISD Comparable Improvement Groups based on percent of economically disadvantaged students in Campus Cohort* $500 $250 0 0 Quartile 1** Quartile 2** Quartile 3 Quartile 4 $500 $250 0 0 Complete Battery Complete Battery Complete Battery Complete Battery $500 $250 0 0 Comparable Group 1 Comparable Group 1 $500 $250 0 0 Comparable Group 2 Comparable Group 2 Comparable Group 3 Comparable Group 3 Comparable Group 4 Comparable Group 4 Strand II B: Non-Core Teacher Performance BasedonCampus-Level Stanford10/Aprenda3 (NCE) * Campus Cohort consists of the current students on a campus with two years of data. ** Must show positive improvement to receive incentive. EXAMPLE

  13. Comparable Group 1 Comparable Group 2 Comparable Group 3 Comparable Group 4 Strand III A: Individual Teacher Performance Based on TAKS Math and Reading (Scale Scores) HISD Comparable Improvement Groups based on % of econ. disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort* Elementary Instructional Cohort TAKS Performance Quartiles* Quartile 1** Quartile 2** Quartile 3 Quartile 4 Math Reading Math Reading Math Reading Math Reading $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 EXAMPLE * Instructional Cohort consists of the current students in a classroom with two years of data. ** Must show positive improvement to receive incentive.

  14. Strand III A: Individual Teacher Performance Based on TAKS (Scale Scores) HISD Comparable Improvement Groups based on % of econ. disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort* EXAMPLE * Instructional Cohort consists of the current students in a classroom with two years of data. ** Must show positive improvement to receive incentive.

  15. Strand III B: Individual Teacher Performance for Third-Grade Reading and Math Teachers Based on Current Year TAKS Comparable Improvement Groups based on % of econ. disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort Third-Grade Reading (First Administration) and Math Instructional Cohort TAKS Performance Quartiles* HISD Comparable Improvement Groups based on % of econ. disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort* Quartile 1** Quartile 2** Quartile 3 Quartile 4 Math Reading Math Reading Math Reading Math Reading Comparable Group 1 $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 Comparable Group 2 $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 Comparable Group 3 $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 Comparable Group 4 $500 $500 $250 $250 0 0 0 0 EXAMPLE * Instructional Cohort performance compared to Campus Standard.Campus Standard is based on previous year’s campuswide third-grade performance. ** Must show positive improvement to receive incentive.

  16. Strand III B: Individual Teacher Performance for Fifth-Grade Science Teachers Based on Current Year TAKS HISD Comparable Improvement Groups based on % of econ. disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort* EXAMPLE * Instructional Cohort performance compared to Campus Standard.Campus Standard is based on previous year’s campuswide fifth-grade performance. ** Must show positive improvement to receive incentive.

  17. Strand III B: Individual Teacher Performance for Eighth-Grade Social Studies and Tenth-Grade SocialStudies&ScienceBasedonCurrentYearTAKS HISD Comparable Improvement Groups based on % of econ. disadvantaged students in Instructional Cohort* EXAMPLE * Instructional Cohort performance compared to Campus Standard.Campus Standard is based on previous year’s campuswide eighth- or tenth-grade performance. ** Must show positive improvement to receive incentive.

  18. Teacher Performance Pay: Proposed Model vs. Previous Model (Spring 2005 Results)

More Related