Chicago TAP did not raise student math or reading scores overall during the four-year rollout in Chicago Public Schools¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q3
Currency · newest study 2012 · checked against its sources 2026-10-08 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The program did not have an impact on student achievement overall in the four-year rollout period in the Chicago Public Schools. → Steven Glazerman 2012
Evidence¶
Steven Glazerman 2012¶
Steven Glazerman, Allison Seifullah. (2012). An Evaluation of the Chicago Teacher Advancement Program (Chicago TAP) After Four Years. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/an-evaluation-of-the-chicago-teacher-advancement-program-chicago-tap-after-four-years
q3 · i? · causal · r?
Final evaluation report of Chicago TAP after four years, comparing participating schools with comparison schools. The report states the program "did not have an impact on student achievement overall"; no effect size is printed on this page.
"However, the program did not have an impact on student achievement overall in the four-year rollout period in the Chicago Public Schools (CPS)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Chicago TAP did not fully implement its performance-based pay or value-added components as intended — related
- TAP produced no measurable impacts on student test scores through March of the start-up year — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- TAP teachers were five percentage points more likely to return to their schools than non-TAP teachers — related
- Mathematica conducted a multi-year evaluation of Chicago TAP, with this report detailing second-year results — related
- Chicago TAP increased the amount of mentoring, promotion opportunities, and compensation in participating schools relative to non-TAP schools — related
- Teachers in Chicago TAP schools at the start of the program were about 20 percent more likely than teachers in comparison schools to remain in the same school three years later — related
- Teachers in TAP schools reported significantly more mentoring and support than peers in similar non-TAP schools — related
- Educators were largely receptive to evaluation and compensation strategies, with 65 to 84 percent satisfied with feedback and pay-for-performance improving some job satisfaction — related
- A five-year evaluation of TAP in high-need Chicago public schools began in 2007 — related
- High-stakes testing without investment did not improve achievement and narrowed instruction — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
chicago-tap-no-student-achievement-impact |
title |
Chicago TAP did not raise student math or reading scores overall during the four-year rollout in Chicago Public Schools |
description |
Chicago TAP did not raise student math or reading scores overall during the four-year rollout in Chicago Public Schools |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2012 |
source_checked |
2026-10-08 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — steven-glazerman-2012 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.