Test-Based Incentive Programs Have Not Consistently Raised Student Achievement

The National Research Council has produce a paper that demonstrates that high stakes testing does not improve student achievement

Despite being used for several decades, test-based incentives have not consistently generated positive effects on student achievement, says a new report from the National Research Council. The report examines evidence on incentive programs, which impose sanctions or offer rewards for students, teachers, or schools on the basis of students’ test performance. Federal and state governments have increasingly relied on incentives in recent decades as a way to raise accountability in public education and in the hope of driving improvements in achievement.

School-level incentives -- like those of No Child Left Behind -- produce some of the larger effects among the programs studied, but the gains are concentrated in elementary grade mathematics and are small in comparison with the improvements the nation hopes to achieve, the report says. Evidence also suggests that high school exit exam programs, as currently implemented in many states, decrease the rate of high school graduation without increasing student achievement.

Policymakers should support the development and evaluation of promising new models that use test-based incentives in more sophisticated ways as one aspect of a richer accountability and improvement process, said the committee that wrote the report.

Incentives’ Effects on Student Achievement

Attaching incentives to test scores can encourage teachers to focus narrowly on the material tested -- in other words, to “teach to the test” -- the report says. As a result, students’ knowledge of the part of the subject matter that appears on the test may increase while their understanding of the untested portion may stay the same or even decrease, and the test scores may give an inflated picture of what students actually know with respect to the full range of content standards.

To control for any score inflation caused by teaching to the test, it is important to evaluate the effects of incentive programs not by looking at changes in the test scores tied to the incentives, but by looking at students’ scores on “low stakes” tests -- such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress -- that are not linked to incentives and are therefore less likely to be inflated, the report says.

When evaluated using low-stakes tests, the overall effects on achievement tend to be small and are effectively zero for a number of incentives programs, the committee concluded. Even when evaluated using the tests attached to the incentives, a number of programs show only small effects.

Some incentives hold teachers or students accountable, while others affect whole schools. School-level incentives like those used in No Child Left Behind produce some of the larger achievement gains, the report says, but even these have an effect size of only around .08 standard deviations – the equivalent of moving a student currently performing at the 50th percentile to the 53rd percentile. For comparison, raising student performance in the U.S. to the level of the highest-performing nations would require a gain equivalent to a student climbing from the 50th to the 84th percentile. The committee noted, however, that although a .08 effect size is small, few other education interventions have shown greater gains.

Effects of High School Exit Exams

The study also examined evidence on the effects of high school exit exams, which are currently used by 25 states and typically involve tests in multiple subjects, all of which students must pass in order to graduate. This research suggests that such exams decrease the rate of high school graduation without improvements in student achievement as measured by low-stakes tests.

Broader Measures of Performance Needed

It is unreasonable to implement incentives tied to tests on a narrow range of content and then criticize teachers for narrowing their instruction to match the tests, said the committee. When incentives are used, the performance measures need to be broad enough to align with desired student outcomes. This means not only expanding the range of content covered by tests but also considering other student outcomes beyond a single test.

Policymakers and researchers should design and evaluate alternate approaches using test-based incentives, the committee said. Among the approaches proposed during current policy debates are those that would deny tenure to teachers whose students fail to meet a minimal level of test performance. Another proposal is to use the narrow information from tests to trigger a more intensive school evaluation that would consider a broader range of information and then provide support to help schools improve. The modest and variable benefits shown by incentive programs so far, however, means that all use of incentives should be rigorously evaluated to determine what works and what does not, said the committee.

In addition, it is important that research on and development of new incentive-based approaches does not displace investment in the development of other aspects of the education system – such as improvements in curricula and instructional methods -- that are important complements to the incentives themselves, the report cautions.

The study was sponsored by Carnegie Corporation of New York and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. The National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies. They are private, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under a congressional charter. The Research Council is the principal operating agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. For more information, visit http://national-academies.org.

The tax loophole test system

A smart article by a New York teacher of the year appears in the Washington Post today. The piece talks about the negative effects of the soon to be implemented system of evaluating teachers based upon student test scores. In New York, 40% of a teachers evaluation will be decided this way. In Ohio under HB153 it would be 50%.

The article makes a lot of good points, but these everyday scenarios get to the heart of some of the problems with relying upon student test scores for high stakes teacher evaluation.

1) Andrew has a severe learning disability. He is a hands-on learner who struggles on written exams. His resource teacher, counselor and mother thought he would be best-served taking a challenging science course, even though everyone knew he would fail the Regents exam. When 40% of a teacher’s evaluation depends on that test score, will schools still make this sort of humane, pedagogically sound decision?

2) Jason missed two days of school this week for golf sectionals. He is a weak student and will struggle to pass the Regents exam. He will miss yet another day next week and perhaps more days if he advances to the state tournament. These golf matches were scheduled during school hours by officials representing New York State. Does the coach or sectional committee bear any responsibility for Jason’s performance on the Regents exam?

3) Tranh moved to America in January to live with his uncle. He speaks very little English and missed half a year of instruction. Who is accountable for his standardized test scores?

4) Simone will miss school all next week because her parents are taking the family on vacation. She will miss five days of instruction for this illegal absence. Will her teachers get an asterisk placed next to Simone’s test scores?

5) Emily finally told her doctor and her parents that she is struggling with depression. She is starting counseling and medication. Needless to say, her grades are suffering. As Emily’s life hangs in the balance, how do we find the strength to show her compassion when we know her poor grades will negatively affect our evaluation?

6) Trudy is a veteran teacher. She volunteered to teach a class of at-risk learners because she has the skills to do so. Her passing rate on the Regents exam will be significantly lower than her peers teaching the stronger students. Under the new APPR, what motivation will teachers have to take on the most challenging students?

7) Marcia teaches art, Beth teaches Special Education and Craig is a Guidance Counselor. There are no standardized assessments attached to their jobs. They are gifted educators, but they—like many others in our profession—will not feel the same pressure as those teachers who have a high-stakes exam attached to their course. How do we deal with the divisiveness caused by this inequality?

8) Diane teaches 4th grade. She worked diligently to prepare her students for the ELA. She went to workshops to learn about standards and her passing rate suggests great skill as a teacher. Last spring, the cut scores were changed without warning. Suddenly both Diane and her students seem less-skilled. How do we ensure that the vagaries of testing don’t harm people like Diane and her students?

Much like corporations seeking out tax loopholes, teachers will soon figure out what to avoid, or worse still, as was discovered in Washington DC under Michele Rhee, how to cheat the system. If you implement a corporate inspired evaluation system, don't be shocked when you get corporate like behaviors.

But what stands out most sharply isn't the deleterious effects this kind of evaluation regime would have on many teachers, but more gravely, the dire impacts on a wide range of students.

This week in education cuts

This weeks local news reports of education cuts from around the state.

Sunday May 22nd, 2011

Monday May 23rd, 2011

Tuesday May 24th, 2011

Wednesday May 25th, 2011

Thursday May 26th, 2011

Friday May 27th, 2011

Teaching Experience Matters

Decades before he became the 2005-2006 New York State Teacher of the Year and was heralded as one of the nation’s leading educators, Stephen Bongiovi almost became something far less glamorous – fired.

The retired English teacher from Long Island was reviewing his personnel files as part of the teacher of the year application process when he received a shock – after his first year of teaching, at least one administrator recommended that he not be retained.

“Someone must have stood up for me,” Bongiovi said, because he was invited back and was allowed to continue what became a stellar career.

But at a time when education “reformers” are criticizing seniority-based layoff policies that prioritize teacher experience, or are advocating for alternative certification programs that may provide only a couple months of teacher preparation, Bongiovi’s story is a powerful reminder that great teachers are not made overnight. Experience matters.

[readon2 url="http://neatoday.org/2011/05/25/why-teaching-experience-matters/"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

Teacher responds to Kasich request for input

Yesterday, Gov. Kasich tweeted a request for input from teachers

Kasich_Tweet

NBC4i ran a news report, with a response from Worthington teacher, and Central OEA President, Scott DiMauro

Scott also shared his submission to the Governor with us

I have to ask what your purpose is in moving to this system. If you're genuinely interested in improving student achievement, you need to make sure performance measures are appropriate, all educators have an equitable opportunity to earn performance-based compensation, and you start from a strong salary schedule that recognizes the two objective factors that make the biggest difference in quality teaching: training and experience.

A one-size-fits-all approach won't work, so it's critical that local control is honored through the collective bargaining process. The first step has to be to drop the misguided policy proposals from HB 153 and begin an honest dialogue with the teachers' unions you so frequently love to disparage.

Thank you for seeking our input. I hope you're really listening.

You can leave your own responses to the Governor at his special web page.

SB5 Polling Trends Favor Repeal

We have now had a series of polls, from different polling firms that all confirm Ohioans overwhemingly support the repeal of SB5 by double digit margins.

Poll For SB5 Against SB5
PPP Mar 15th 31% 54%
Wenzel Apr 12th 38% 51%
Quinnipiac May 18th 36% 54%
PPP May 25th 35% 55%

SB5 Polling Trend

With legislators of SB5 starting to leave the Ohio Senate, rather than face voters, it looks likely that the face of the pro-SB5 effort will have to be the Governor himself. But as the latest PPP poll shows his popularity is now at all time lows, he's going to find it very hard getting voters to listen to him

Kasich has slipped a bit to 33-56, tying him with Florida’s Rick Scott for the most reviled governor in the country. Unlike Scott Walker, Kasich’s agenda has not at all rallied his base. He has plummeted with Republicans, from an already somewhat weak 71-18 approval margin two months ago to an abysmal 58-28 now

None of this means the effort should let up. Things could change quickly if supporters of repeal become complacent.