Sunday, October 3, 2010

How Wake County Is Jeopardizing Teachers’ Bonuses

In late August, the US Department of Education awarded Race to the Top funds to 9 states for proposing unique approaches to improving the quality of education. North Carolina’s share is $400 million, with Wake County standing to gain $5-10 million in additional funds.

The Race to the Top requirements are rigid and targeted, making states advance reform in four areas:
  • Prepare students to compete in the global economy
  • Build data systems that measure student growth and success
  • Recruit, reward, and retain effective teachers and principals
  • Turn around the lowest-achieving schools
The North Carolina application addresses the requirements by:
  • Adding additional standards for evaluating teachers and principals
  • Providing financial incentives for educators
  • Changing evaluation of expected student growth from school-level to classroom-level
This post will compare how the state and Wake County evaluate student growth and how this will influence teacher bonuses.

Both student proficiency and growth are measured by standardized tests. Proficiency means that the student has mastered the course material sufficiently to go on to the next grade. No Child Left Behind legislation used student proficiency to determine if a school was successful. But in many cases, students start the school year far below proficiency. They are so far behind that they can not catch up in just one or two years. Race to the Top added another measure for evaluating student success which takes into account the student’s achievement level at the beginning of the school year. The difference in their achievement from year to year is called “growth.”

North Carolina is changing from measuring student growth at a school level to a classroom level. Even though a teacher’s students may start the year so far behind that they cannot catch up in a single year, if the students exceed expected growth based on where they began, the teacher will be rewarded. In addition, North Carolina will offer special bonuses for teachers with high numbers of low achieving students who exceed expected growth. These teachers will be eligible for an extra incentive of $1,500 each year.

US Department of Education guidelines state that all students should be held to the same expectations. Expectations for student growth are explicitly disallowed from using student demographic information (gender, race, economic status) or school characteristics. In North Carolina, the state measurement system complies with the federal guidelines, but Wake County uses a different system.

Wake County uses the Effectiveness Index which adjusts expectations based on both student and school characteristics. Specifically, it lowers the expected academic growth of low income students and students attending high poverty schools. Therefore, teachers of low income students and/or in high poverty schools are measured against a lower expected level of student growth. This is a clear violation of state and federal guidelines and Race to the Top requirements.

Let’s compare the academic growth predictions for two students, John and Mike. John receives Free and Reduced Lunch (F&R) and goes to a school with 65% F&R students. Mike is not F&R and goes to a school with 20 % F&R students.
Both boys score 350 on their 5th grade EOG. The following table shows their predicted scores for the 6th grade EOG from the Effectiveness Index (EI) and the state’s system and their actual score.


Student

5th Grade Math EOG

EI 6th    Grade Prediction

State 6th Grade Prediction

Actual 6th Grade EOG

John

350

345

353

347

Mike

350

355

353

354

How will this data be interpreted? The data is used to evaluate education programs as well as the effectiveness of teachers and schools. An administrator would compare John's actual score of 347 to the 345 predicted by the Effectiveness Index and conclude John did better than expected. But his prediction was lowered because of his economic status and lowered again because he goes to a school with a high number of economically disadvantaged students. The Effectiveness Index masks ineffective programs and teachers by setting lower expectations for some students.


The state would compare John's actual 347 to the predicted 353 and conclude he did worse than expected. John did not make expected growth.


Now let's look at Mike. According to the Effectiveness Index, Mike did not meet expectations. Wake County would conclude his teacher was ineffective!

What does this mean for teachers? It means that their school system sets different expectations compared to the state’s expectations. Wake County would commend John’s teacher, but not Mike’s. The state would not reward John's teacher, but would reward Mike’s.
The new teacher bonuses are based only on the state’s measure of expected growth. Why is Wake County jeopardizing teachers’ bonuses by using a different standard?

Also, Wake County has a history of not placing students in appropriate, challenging classes. Students placed below their potential may not achieve expected growth. This means their teachers may not be eligible for bonuses.

John has a history of strong achievement and will have a projection of high growth. If he is not placed in challenging classes and exposed to rigorous course material, he will not have an opportunity to demonstrate his abilities and will not show expected growth even with an outstanding teacher. The tragedy for John is a lack of opportunity that impedes him from reaching his potential. And his teachers? They may not receive a bonus. If John isn’t challenged appropriately, his earlier high achievement will reflect badly on both his middle school and high school teachers.

High school math teachers should review their students’ projections. How many of your Level 4 students met the criteria for advanced math in middle school, but did not take 8th grade algebra? How many of them did not meet growth when they took 9th grade algebra even though they scored Level 4 on the 8th grade EOG?

The Effectiveness Index violates federal and state mandates as well as Race to the Top requirements. It produces inaccurate and misleading results which are inconsistent with the state's results. It incorrectly asseses the effectiveness of school programs and teachers. As long as WCPSS uses the Effectiveness index, principals and teachers will receive conflicting information about the student growth in their classrooms.

The use of the Effectiveness Index should be discontinued immediately. Our teachers and principals deserve to receive the highest quality information possible. Why is Wake County jeopardizing their bonuses?

 
References:

North Carolina’s Accepted Race to the Top Application







1 comment:

  1. I do not have particularly strong feelings about this issue, but I don't think it is accurate to say that using the Effectiveness Index is "jeopardizing" any teacher bonuses.

    The June 2010 Race to the Top Narrative submitted by NC says:

    Phase II (2012-14) – Beginning in the 2012-13 school year, the incentive bonus program for the lowest-achieving schools will transition from a school-level to a classroom-level program for classroom teachers. Teachers whose students exceed expected growth at the classroom level – based on the adoption of a uniform, statewide set of acceptable measures of pre-approved student growth data for all subject areas, as noted above and as explained in component 3 of the Educator Evaluation Plan, below – will be eligible for the $1,500 award...

    How does using the Effectiveness Index in 2010-2011 (or 2012-2013, though I don't think it will be in use then) "jeopardize" teacher bonuses that will be awarded beginning in 2012-2013 based on other criteria? What am I missing?

    Neil Riemann

    ReplyDelete