Providing educators with performance feedback and offering pay-for-performance bonuses can improve student achievement, with positive cumulative impacts on math or reading in some years¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across years of implementation, each tested strategy sometimes had a positive cumulative impact on students' math or reading achievement. → Andrew Wayne 2018

Evidence¶

Andrew Wayne 2018¶

Andrew Wayne, Michael Garet, Alison Wellington, Hanley Chiang. (2018). Promoting Educator Effectiveness: The Effects of Two Key Strategies. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/

q2 · i? · causal · r?

The brief's key findings summarize two IES studies: a two-year evaluation of performance feedback using research-based measures, and a four-year evaluation of pay-for-performance bonuses. The brief reports that "each tested strategy sometimes had a positive cumulative impact" on math or reading achievement; no effect sizes are printed in the brief.

"Providing educators with performance feedback and offering pay-for-performance bonuses can improve student achievement. Across years of implementation, each tested strategy sometimes had a positive cumulative impact on students’ math or reading achievement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Offering pay-for-performance bonuses in 10 TIF districts increased student reading achievement by 1 percentile point after two years, with a similar-magnitude but statistically non-significant math effect — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• After three years of Teacher Incentive Fund implementation, pay-for-performance bonuses had small positive impacts on student math and reading achievement in ten evaluation districts — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The TIF evaluation is designed to estimate impacts of performance pay on student achievement and on educators' attitudes, awareness, mobility, and recruitment — related
• Many teachers misunderstood whether they were eligible for performance bonuses or the amount they could earn — related
• Few districts structured pay-for-performance bonuses to align well with TIF grant guidance — related
• Some aspects of TIF implementation improved between years one and two while others, including bonus awareness, remained challenging — related
• In the 2010 TIF pay-for-performance programs, over 60% of teachers received a bonus, with average bonuses of about $1,800 and top performers earning more than 3 times the average — related
• The average TIF bonus was about 4% of average teacher salary, below the 5% recommended by TIF grant guidance for substantial bonuses — related
• The TIF evaluation provides an in-depth analysis of implementation and pay-for-performance impacts for ten districts after three years, and program-wide implementation descriptions for all 2010 grantees — related
• Educators in schools offering pay-for-performance bonuses tended to be less satisfied than those in schools without bonuses — related
• Small career-ladder bonuses can affect teacher behavior without necessarily producing large effects — related
• By the second year of implementation, TIF performance bonuses improved reading and math achievement by 1 to 2 percentile points, equivalent to about four weeks of additional learning — a narrower finding that bears on this claim