In Ms. Jones' and Ms. Richards' districts, there has been talk among the teachers who will receive rewards to pool the money and then redistribute it equally to all teachers in the district. Teachers recognize how challenging it is to teach low-income students and non-English speakers. Those who are slated to receive extra cash do not want to see their less fortunate colleagues penalized financially for attempting to teach students at risk of academic failure.
An effective, fair way to hold teachers accountable is to assess each one individually using multiple criteria. Possible considerations are these:
- Student demographics
- Student portfolios
- Teacher portfolios
- Peer evaluations
- Administrator evaluations
Final thoughts
Presumably, the purpose of the API rewards is to hold teachers and schools accountable. As these interviews show, however, attaching so much importance to a single test score can be damaging to the morale and performance of both teachers and students. In order to retain the ethical, hardworking, talented teachers needed in today's schools, it makes sense to devise a multiple-criteria approach for accountability purposes.
Academic Performance Indicator (API)
Major benefits
Based on the Academic Performance Indicator (API) of each school, the state of California will, between January and March 2001, distribute three different rewards for students' SAT9 (Stanford Achievement Test, 9th Edition) test scores for the 1999-2000 year:
1. Governor's Performance Awards (GPI): $227 million total
Each school that meets or exceeds its state-determined goal will receive $68 per student. In most cases, this amounts to tens of thousands of dollars per school.
2. School Site Employee Performance Bonus: $350 million total
In every school that receives the GPI reward, each teacher will receive an individual monetary reward of approximately $500 to $700.
3. Certificated Staff Performance Incentive Act: $100 million total
Schools that do not qualify for the above two rewards because of low performance are eligible for this program. Rather than measuring year 2000 growth, these schools must show improvement in 1998-1999 SAT9 scores. In schools that realized more than two times their anticipated growth, those teachers will receive $25,000 each. Teachers at schools with the next largest gains are due $10,000 each. Teachers at schools with the last largest gains will receive $5,000 each.
Major flaws
1. Non-English speaking students are given the test in English. Common sense dictates that schools with large populations of second-language learners will not score highly.
2. The SAT9 is not closely aligned with state standards. So, in classes where teachers are following the standards, students are tested on material that may not be taught.
3. Educational researchers (Popham, 1999; Sacks, 1997) have reported that standardized test scores are more accurately predicted by family income than by student achievement. That is not to say that a wealthy child will not score poorly or that a poor child will not score well; individuals break through barriers and belie the statistics all of the time. As a group, however, wealthy districts are more likely to have larger numbers of high scorers, and poorer districts are more likely to have larger numbers of low scorers.
Sources
Morse, Jodie. TIME Magazine, June 19, 2000, 34-38.
Popham, James W. "Where large-scale educational assessment is heading and why it shouldn't." Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 13-17, 1999.
Sacks, Peter. "Standardized testing: Meritocracy's crooked yardstick." Change, 23-31, 1997.
Jamie Worthington taught elementary school for four years and is currently writing her doctoral dissertation at the University of San Francisco. Her area of concentration is gifted education.
Related Resources
Cognition, Teaching, and Assessment
The fundamentals of information processing, cognition and instruction, and assessment relative to individual differences are covered in this book.
California Department of Education
Find information about the specific conditions under which schools and teachers are eligible to receive the API rewards are outlined in the Public Schools Accountability Act of 1999.
https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap/
