Greg Mild, a public high school teacher in the state of Ohio, wrote this on April 25, 2011. He graciously gave me permission to share it here.
I've been wondering why no one is talking about the "teacher incentive payment program" that Governor Kasich has included in his budget proposal. Are we wondering if maybe it's a good thing? Are we thinking that maybe we want to keep this component of his proposal because it offers teachers a chance at getting more money?
Well, today I have the details. I have the projected dollar amounts and where those students and teachers are located. And I'm going to tell you why all teachers should summarily reject the Governor's proposal as an insult to education.
I'll warn you in advance that this issue has many layers, and I didn't even come close to addressing them all.
First the background:
In the budget bill (HB 153, Sec. 3302.23), the Governor proposes paying teachers fifty dollars per student for a class where students demonstrate more than a standard year of growth as determined by the Ohio Department of Education's value-added model, a measure based on Ohio's standardized tests. This growth is designated as Green on the state's report (Yellow designates a year, Red designates less than a year; full reports can be found in the Ratings folder at: http://ilrc.ode.state.oh.us/PublicDW/asp/Main.aspx?server=mstris2&project=ILRC&evt=3002&uid=guest&pwd&persist-mode=%228%22)
These results are only applicable to students in grades 4-8 in Reading and Math. In co-teaching situations, or situations where students grow in both areas, teachers will split the stipend equally. A single student represents a single fifty dollar stipend.
The rationale from Kasich's Reform Book reads:
LAYER #1 -- All professional educators in Ohio should find the Governor's comparison to Teach for America insulting, at best. You can read my note about TFA here: "Ohio does not need Teach for America -- Here's Why"
So if I let that insult slide and focus instead on the "Reward" that is promised, I need to know what this reward looks like.
The Ohio Department of Education databases for Value-Added results do not identify teachers or specific classrooms, but they do identify student counts in grade levels by schools. Using this data set, I projected the total stipend amounts that would have been paid out over the past four years.
2007: $20,854,900.00
2008: $18,660,050.00
2009: $20,240,000.00
2010: $15,918,150.00
Why the significant drop for 2010? The value-added calculations were "reset" to better balance the results. According to ODE:
Hmm. According to the Ohio Department of Education the tests that we are using to judge the performance of teachers and students for annual growth "were not created with consideration for value-added analysis needs." And these tests will remain in place until new assessments are launched (SY 2013-2014).
The Governor wants to use a flawed model to calculate not only Teacher Incentive Pay, he is also proposing using this value-added model as a key component of school district funding (LAYER #2: http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/04/23/exclusive-john-kasichs-school-funding-model-revealed/) and as a key measure in the evaluation of an individual teacher's compensation (LAYER #3: Dissection of Performance Pay for Teachers in Ohio Senate Bill 5 .
I threw those Teacher Incentive Program payments at you without much warning or detail, so let's take a second look.
2007: $20,854,900.00
2008: $18,660,050.00
2009: $20,240,000.00
2010: $15,918,150.00
Remembering that these numbers represent $50 per student, we can extrapolate the following numbers of students who demonstrated more than a year of growth each those years.
2007: 417,098
2008: 373,201
2009: 404,800
2010: 318,363
This demonstrates the significant effect the recalculation of the value-added model has on the final numbers, and on incentive pay, and teacher salary, and district funding.
BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!
LAYER #4: You may remember that Governor Kasich has also proposed another component to "hold teachers accountable" in his Reform Book:
In my post about teacher testing, I alluded to the fact that under Kasich's proposal, teachers could receive incentive pay AND have to retake the Praxis exams. I have confirmed this to be true. Based on the ODE data, I can only calculate the number of grades (classes) and schools affected in this manner.
2008: 741 out of 3342 classes
2009: 1123 out of 4175 classes
2010: 860 out of 3146 classes
In 2008, 22% of the teachers receiving Teacher Incentive Pay because "Teachers who are helping students gain more than a year‘s growth in a year deserve to be rewarded" would also need to retake the necessary Praxis exams because "Struggling schools need to be sure teachers are competent and fully capable of teaching their assigned curriculum."
In 2009, 27% of the teachers receiving Teacher Incentive Pay because "Teachers who are helping students gain more than a year‘s growth in a year deserve to be rewarded" would also need to retake the necessary Praxis exams because "Struggling schools need to be sure teachers are competent and fully capable of teaching their assigned curriculum."
In 2010, 27% of the teachers receiving Teacher Incentive Pay because "Teachers who are helping students gain more than a year‘s growth in a year deserve to be rewarded" would also need to retake the necessary Praxis exams because "Struggling schools need to be sure teachers are competent and fully capable of teaching their assigned curriculum."
But look, let's not argue about the details, right? This is just the stuff that teacher unions tell you to try and make the Governor look stupid.
How am I doing so far?
I've been wondering why no one is talking about the "teacher incentive payment program" that Governor Kasich has included in his budget proposal. Are we wondering if maybe it's a good thing? Are we thinking that maybe we want to keep this component of his proposal because it offers teachers a chance at getting more money?
Well, today I have the details. I have the projected dollar amounts and where those students and teachers are located. And I'm going to tell you why all teachers should summarily reject the Governor's proposal as an insult to education.
I'll warn you in advance that this issue has many layers, and I didn't even come close to addressing them all.
First the background:
In the budget bill (HB 153, Sec. 3302.23), the Governor proposes paying teachers fifty dollars per student for a class where students demonstrate more than a standard year of growth as determined by the Ohio Department of Education's value-added model, a measure based on Ohio's standardized tests. This growth is designated as Green on the state's report (Yellow designates a year, Red designates less than a year; full reports can be found in the Ratings folder at: http://ilrc.ode.state.oh.us/PublicDW/asp/Main.aspx?server=mstris2&project=ILRC&evt=3002&uid=guest&pwd&persist-mode=%228%22)
These results are only applicable to students in grades 4-8 in Reading and Math. In co-teaching situations, or situations where students grow in both areas, teachers will split the stipend equally. A single student represents a single fifty dollar stipend.
The rationale from Kasich's Reform Book reads:
Reward Superior EducatorsBut let me put those statements into context for you. The heading and sentence that immediately precedes these reads:
What will change
Pay teachers a per-student bonus for every student in a class which achieves more than one year growth as measured by the value-added dimension of the local report cards.
Why this change is important
Teachers who are helping students gain more than a year‘s growth in a year deserve to be rewarded.
Put Superior Teachers in Every Classroom,
Excellent Principals in Every School
We will make Ohio the preferred destination for creative, talented educators including Teach for America.
LAYER #1 -- All professional educators in Ohio should find the Governor's comparison to Teach for America insulting, at best. You can read my note about TFA here: "Ohio does not need Teach for America -- Here's Why"
So if I let that insult slide and focus instead on the "Reward" that is promised, I need to know what this reward looks like.
The Ohio Department of Education databases for Value-Added results do not identify teachers or specific classrooms, but they do identify student counts in grade levels by schools. Using this data set, I projected the total stipend amounts that would have been paid out over the past four years.
2007: $20,854,900.00
2008: $18,660,050.00
2009: $20,240,000.00
2010: $15,918,150.00
Why the significant drop for 2010? The value-added calculations were "reset" to better balance the results. According to ODE:
- A stabilization process was included as part of the value-added analysis to provide you with more useful and consistent information about grade and subject gains. This will provide a more even distribution of value-added results for subject- and grade-level ratings.
- This typically happens every 3-4 years to better reflect current state performance averages.
- Over the past two years, there have been considerable skews in the grade- and subject- level gains for a cohort from one year to the next. Value-added models assume there is vertical alignment in the rigor of tests, that is, the rigor in this years’ fourth-grade reading test is of the same amount of rigor in next years’ fifth-grade reading test. However, the previous assessments were not created with consideration for value-added analysis needs. Until Ohio launches the new assessments, the addition of the stabilization process is a necessary interim solution to providing Ohio practitioners full utilization of value-added information.
Hmm. According to the Ohio Department of Education the tests that we are using to judge the performance of teachers and students for annual growth "were not created with consideration for value-added analysis needs." And these tests will remain in place until new assessments are launched (SY 2013-2014).
The Governor wants to use a flawed model to calculate not only Teacher Incentive Pay, he is also proposing using this value-added model as a key component of school district funding (LAYER #2: http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/04/23/exclusive-john-kasichs-school-funding-model-revealed/) and as a key measure in the evaluation of an individual teacher's compensation (LAYER #3: Dissection of Performance Pay for Teachers in Ohio Senate Bill 5 .
I threw those Teacher Incentive Program payments at you without much warning or detail, so let's take a second look.
2007: $20,854,900.00
2008: $18,660,050.00
2009: $20,240,000.00
2010: $15,918,150.00
Remembering that these numbers represent $50 per student, we can extrapolate the following numbers of students who demonstrated more than a year of growth each those years.
2007: 417,098
2008: 373,201
2009: 404,800
2010: 318,363
This demonstrates the significant effect the recalculation of the value-added model has on the final numbers, and on incentive pay, and teacher salary, and district funding.
BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!
LAYER #4: You may remember that Governor Kasich has also proposed another component to "hold teachers accountable" in his Reform Book:
Test Teachers in Poor-Performing Schools(I posted more detail here: http://www.plunderbund.com/2011/04/20/kasichs-teacher-testing-program-a-second-look/)
What will change
Teachers employed in a school identified in the bottom [ten] percent of the state‘s schools on the basis of student results will be required to take licensure tests.
Why this change is important
Massachusetts successfully implemented a teacher-testing program that significantly improved student results. Teachers were tested on the content they were assigned to teach.
Struggling schools need to be sure teachers are competent and fully capable of teaching their assigned curriculum. Testing teachers to be sure they know their content and basic pedagogy is a key step in this process.
Testing will make sure teachers are competent in the subjects they are teaching. Limiting this provision to poor-performing schools will minimize costs and avoid unnecessary burdens on quality schools.
In my post about teacher testing, I alluded to the fact that under Kasich's proposal, teachers could receive incentive pay AND have to retake the Praxis exams. I have confirmed this to be true. Based on the ODE data, I can only calculate the number of grades (classes) and schools affected in this manner.
2008: 741 out of 3342 classes
2009: 1123 out of 4175 classes
2010: 860 out of 3146 classes
In 2008, 22% of the teachers receiving Teacher Incentive Pay because "Teachers who are helping students gain more than a year‘s growth in a year deserve to be rewarded" would also need to retake the necessary Praxis exams because "Struggling schools need to be sure teachers are competent and fully capable of teaching their assigned curriculum."
In 2009, 27% of the teachers receiving Teacher Incentive Pay because "Teachers who are helping students gain more than a year‘s growth in a year deserve to be rewarded" would also need to retake the necessary Praxis exams because "Struggling schools need to be sure teachers are competent and fully capable of teaching their assigned curriculum."
In 2010, 27% of the teachers receiving Teacher Incentive Pay because "Teachers who are helping students gain more than a year‘s growth in a year deserve to be rewarded" would also need to retake the necessary Praxis exams because "Struggling schools need to be sure teachers are competent and fully capable of teaching their assigned curriculum."
But look, let's not argue about the details, right? This is just the stuff that teacher unions tell you to try and make the Governor look stupid.
How am I doing so far?
