District Awards for Teacher Excellence (D.A.T.E.) Program: Year One Evaluation Report. Policy Evaluation Report. [Executive Summary]

Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige

Trefferliste

Autor/inn/en	Springer, Matthew G.; Lewis, Jessica L.; Podgursky, Michael J.; Ehlert, Mark W.; Taylor, Lori L.; Lopez, Omar S.; Ghoshdastidar, Bonnie; Peng, Art
Institution	Vanderbilt University, National Center on Performance Incentives
Titel	District Awards for Teacher Excellence (D.A.T.E.) Program: Year One Evaluation Report. Policy Evaluation Report. [Executive Summary]
Quelle	(2010), (6 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Program Effectiveness; Awards; Program Design; Teacher Salaries; Policy Analysis; Program Evaluation; Research Reports; Merit Pay; Merit Rating; Program Implementation; Incentive Grants; Participation; Change Strategies; Educational Change; Performance Factors; Educational Improvement; Improvement Programs; Texas + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Award; Auszeichnung; Programme design; Programmaufbau; Programmplanung; Lehrerbesoldung; Lehrervergütung; Politikfeldanalyse; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Research report; Forschungsbericht; Leistungszulage; Analytische Arbeitsbewertung; Finanzieller Anreiz; Teilnahme; Lösungsstrategie; Bildungsreform; Leistungsindikator; Teaching improvement; Unterrichtsentwicklung; Effizienzsteigerung
Abstract	The District Awards for Teacher Excellence's (D.A.T.E.'s) first year of implementation in 2008-09 occurred at a time when Texas was operating several state-funded performance pay programs. The three-year Governor's Educator Excellence Grant (G.E.E.G.) program was coming to its expected completion, while the Texas Educator Excellence Grant (T.E.E.G.) program was in its third year of operation. During the 2008-09 school year, these programs dedicated a combined $247 million in state funds for the implementation of locally-designed performance pay plans. However, the Texas Legislature opted not to reauthorize T.E.E.G. during the 2009 session, redirecting a portion of its funds to expand the D.A.T.E. program from approximately $150 million to $197 million annually. Performance pay for teachers entered Texas state policy deliberations during the 1980s, well before G.E.E.G., T.E.E.G., and D.A.T.E. came into existence. The 1980s was a decade marked as one of the most active periods of school reform in Texas. As early as the Texas Teacher Career Ladder program in 1984, policymakers attempted to reform the single-salary schedule and introduce performance pay for educators. Several lessons emerged from those first generation programs and play a significant role in the design and implementation of contemporary performance pay programs in the state, such as D.A.T.E. Specific lessons include the importance of (1) adequate, sustainable funding, (2) teacher involvement in program design, (3) rewarding educators for their contribution to student performance and professional collaboration, and (4) conducting independent, comprehensive program evaluations. This executive summary presents findings from the first year of D.A.T.E. (2008-09 school year), with emphasis on program participation decisions made by districts, the local design preferences for performance pay plans, and the early implementation experiences of D.A.T.E. participants. The first round of incentive awards for educators and other allowable grant funds were distributed in D.A.T.E. schools from May 2009 to February 2010, allowing evaluators to begin further examination of program outcomes to be presented in a later evaluation report. (Contains 1 footnote.) [For the full report, "District Awards for Teacher Excellence (D.A.T.E.) Program: Year One Evaluation Report. Policy Evaluation Report," see ED510424.] (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	National Center on Performance Incentives. Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, PMB #43, 230 Appleton Place, Nashville, TN 37203. Tel: 615-322-5538; Fax: 615-322-6018; e-mail: ncpi@vanderbilt.edu; Web site: https://my.vanderbilt.edu/performanceincentives
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10