Developing a new reward structure that effectively identifies, evaluates, and incentivizes teachers is a pillar of the Operation Public Education (OPE) framework. The logic is that significant increases in student achievement will not emerge until our reward structures directly support our educational goals. In most districts across the country, teacher compensation still follows the single-salary schedule, which rewards teachers based on the acquisition of advanced education credentials and years of service, which have little if any impact on student learning. In contrast, this framework proposes an evaluation and compensation system based on both empirical data from value-added assessment and observation data from a rigorous peer-review process. OPE has identified five components that work together to create this new reward structure. Accompanied by a new system of supports, this new reward structure can help to attract and retain high quality educators. See below to learn more about the new reward structure’s key principles and individual components.
OPE’s approach to a new reward structure differs significantly from previous attempts at merit pay. It is not a limited bonus for which teachers compete or something tacked onto the existing salary schedule but a whole new way of thinking about compensation that draws on the evaluation of a teacher’s overall performance. This new reward structure incorporates the following principles.
- Multiple Measures. Evaluation is based on a balanced approach, using both empirical data from value–added assessment and observational data to gauge teacher and administrator effectiveness. Value-added assessment provides the empirical component in evaluation and sophisticated performance frameworks are used to evaluate teacher and administrator actions.
- Alignment. Compensation is aligned with the evaluation system to reflect performance and reward improvement. Further, the new reward structure is aligned with new forms of support to ensure that all resources are used strategically to improve instruction and increase student achievement.
- Professional Growth. Districts should promote career advancement and provide all educators with the opportunity to develop professionally. This means offering additional leadership positions, as well as access to increased salaries much earlier in an educator’s career.
- Quality Assurance. Sophisticated teacher evaluation frameworks should identify teachers of various levels of effectiveness and ensure that only competent teachers remain in classrooms. This means providing sufficient support, but also instituting a fair means for dismissing teachers who fail to improve their effectiveness.
- Full inclusion. All teachers, regardless of subject taught or specialist function, and administrators should be included in the compensation system. While they cannot necessarily be treated in exactly the same way, a fair system should provide everyone with an opportunity to earn additional pay.
The OPE Career Ladder
OPE has designed a teacher career ladder that aligns with these principles. At each rung of the ladder – Apprentice, Career, Advanced, and Distinguished – teachers receive higher pay and increased leadership opportunities. They begin their careers as Apprentices and can advance to Career status if they receive proficient ratings and have effective value-added scores. Teachers can remain in this category throughout their tenure as long as they continue to obtain effective evaluations. To move up to Advanced status, teachers must receive distinguished ratings and have highly effective value-added scores, which means their students are exceeding expectations. To reach the Distinguished rung, OPE recommends that teachers meet all the requirements for Advanced status and assume additional leadership as a mentor, coach, team leader, or content specialist. In this system, by their eighth year in the profession, teachers can be earning the highest salary paid in the district. The career ladder:
- Rewards educators for improving practice and increasing student achievement. The career ladder eliminates salary increases for completing college coursework and advanced degrees, instead awarding one-time bonuses for achieving National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) certification and educational degrees. An educator’s base salary level is driven by moving up the ladder based on two performance factors – student progress, measured by value-added assessment, and observation rubrics.
- Encourages consistent performance through base and variable pay. The career ladder provides incentives to keep teachers performing at the level of mastery required at their rung by dividing salary into base pay and variable pay, and making variable pay as well as step-based pay dependent on maintaining the appropriate level of effectiveness.
- Enhances collaboration through group variable pay. In addition to providing additional incentive pay, the compensation system rewards schools for achieving/exceeding educational goals on a scorecard. The incentive payout does not roll into base salary, so it must be re-earned each year. This system enhances collaboration among educators.
- Secures teacher buy-in by ensuring that no teacher would earn less in the new system than at the top of the old. The career ladder can be funded with or without additional monies. When new funds are available, additional incentive pay can be offered, Career teachers earn as much as they did in the old compensation system, but Advanced and Distinguished teachers can earn substantially more.
View the career ladder. A parallel administrator career ladder evaluates and rewards administrator performance. Additional information on both of these ladders is provided in A Grand Bargain for Education Reform.
Each of the five components of the OPE reward system is described briefly below and highlighted as a page of this website. These component pages include an overview of and rationale for each component, specific recommendations, pertinent research and publications, useful websites, and concrete tools for implementation.
Choosing a Value Added Model
Used by a growing number of states and districts, value-added assessment is a new way to measure teaching and learning. Based on a review of students’ test score gains from previous grades, researchers can predict the amount of growth those students are likely to make in a given year. Thus, value-added assessment can show whether particular students have made the expected amount of progress, have made less progress than expected, or have been stretched beyond what they could reasonably be expected to achieve. Using these same methods, one can look back over several years to measure the impact that a particular teacher or school had on student achievement. Value-added assessment also gives educators a powerful diagnostic tool for measuring the effect of pedagogy, curricula, and professional development on academic achievement and provides all K-12 stakeholders a fair and accurate foundation on which to build a new system of accountability.
Teacher Evaluation
Enhanced teacher evaluation systems can be a catalyst for both school and classroom improvement. Rigorous evaluation systems identify teachers at various levels of effectiveness, ensure that only competent teachers remain in classrooms, and drive improvements in instructional practice. Although there is a growing consensus that a comprehensive system of teacher evaluation should be based on multiple measures of performance, including both inputs (what teachers do) and outputs (how much students learn), this page focuses primarily on the input side of teacher evaluation. Specifically, it provides information as to how teachers can be evaluated through observation and performance rubrics.
Administrator Evaluation
The interests of all members of the school team should be aligned, so that administrators as well as teachers have an equal stake in the learning outcomes of the students in their classroom, school, or district. Districts should develop new approaches for evaluating school leaders and district personnel that promote professional growth. Although there is a growing consensus that a comprehensive system of administrator evaluation should be based on multiple measures of performance, including both inputs (what administrators do) and outputs (how much students learn), this page focuses primarily on the input side of administrator evaluation – that is, how administrators’ behaviors can be evaluated through performance rubrics.
Compensation
The current emphasis on teacher quality, coupled with the increased demands of the new global economy, has stimulated interest in differentiated compensation initiatives. Advocates of reforming teacher compensation contend that performance pay will help to recruit, motivate, reward, and retain high quality educators. Though initiatives vary in design, forms of differentiated pay can be categorized in the following ways: (1) extra pay for superior individual performance; (2) extra pay for superior group performance; (3) knowledge and skill-based pay; (4) job-based pay – teachers receive extra pay for extra work; and (5) market-based pay. This page discusses the various characteristics of these efforts and highlights key principles to keep in mind when reforming teacher compensation.
Compensating Educators in the Absence of Value-Added Assessment
Teachers and specialists in non-tested subjects and grades may not be eligible for pay for performance systems since individual awards are often based on student performance on high-stakes exams. These teachers and school staff fall into three categories: pre-K to 2, noncore academic (music, PE, foreign language, etc.), and specialists (librarians, nurses, etc.). Current district initiatives provide some examples of how teachers falling into these categories can be included in pay for performance systems. These approaches to inclusion are classified in the following ways: (1) partial inclusion, (2) group awards, and (3) full inclusion.