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¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? After two years of implementation in 10 TIF districts, pay-for-performance bonuses increased student reading achievement by 1 percentile point, about three additional weeks of learning; the math impact was similar in magnitude but not statistically significant. → Chiang 2015

Evidence¶

Chiang 2015¶

Chiang, H., Wellington, A., Hallgren, K., Speroni, C., Herrmann, M., Glazerman, S., & Constantine, J. (2015). Implementation and Impacts of Pay-for-Performance: The 2010 Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) Grantees After Two Years (Snapshot). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/

q3 · i? · causal · r?

Impact evaluation of the 2010 TIF grantees after two years in 10 districts: the report finds bonuses "increased student reading achievement by 1 percentile point", described as a small gain of about three additional weeks of learning, while the math impact was not statistically significant. No standardized effect size is printed.

"After two years of implementation in 10 TIF districts, offering pay-for-performance bonuses increased student reading achievement by 1 percentile point–a small gain of about three additional weeks of learning. The impact on math achievement was similar in magnitude but not statistically significant."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• 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 — related
• Few districts structured pay-for-performance bonuses to align well with TIF grant guidance — related
• Many teachers misunderstood whether they were eligible for performance bonuses or the amount they could earn — 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
• Educators' understanding of the TIF program improved in year two, but more than one-third of teachers still did not know they were eligible for a bonus and underestimated bonus size — related
• Some aspects of TIF implementation improved between years one and two while others, including bonus awareness, remained challenging — related
• The TIF evaluation is designed to estimate impacts of performance pay on student achievement and on educators' attitudes, awareness, mobility, and recruitment — related
• 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 — a broader claim this one bears on
• 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 — 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
• Input-based incentives produce achievement gains at lower cost than major education reforms of recent decades — related