Research shows that many of the traditional measures of teacher effectiveness—credentials, experience or education—are not strongly related to teachers’ ability to improve student achievement (Wayne and Youngs, 2003; Kane, Rockoff, and Staiger, 2008).  Recently-enacted federal programs such as the Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) and Race to the Top have provided incentives for states and districts to develop new measures of teacher effectiveness and use these measures to evaluate, reward, develop, dismiss, and promote teachers.  Many states and districts are developing alternative measures of teacher effectiveness (for example, growth in student achievement and new measures of instructional practice) and are using the measures in human resource policies, including efforts to make the distribution of effective teachers more equitable. 

# Research Questions 

1. How did the five case study districts identify effective teachers and what were some of the challenges associated with the measures that the districts used? 

2. How did the districts use information about teachers’ effectiveness in human resource policies? ****

3. How did the districts use information about teachers’ effectiveness in their efforts to make the distribution of effective teachers more equitable?  

# Study Design 

This report is based on case studies of five school districts that were recommended as using data on student achievement growth to identify effective teachers, implement performance pay initiatives or other human resource policies, and seek to ensure an equitable distribution of effective teachers, particularly in high-need schools.  

The five districts are:

· Columbus City Schools (Ohio)

· Eagle County Schools (Colorado)

· Hamilton County Public Schools (Tennessee)

· Hillsborough County Public Schools (Florida)

· Houston Independent School District (Texas)

Study team members visited each district to learn about their specific approaches to assessing teacher effectiveness.  Study methods included interviews with district-level staff, teachers’ association or union 

                                                                                        representatives, and principals, as well as analysis of district documents and materials.

**Highlights**

· All five districts used student achievement growth as one measure of teacher effectiveness for some or all teachers.  In addition, four districts used new or revised observation‐based assessments in conjunction with achievement growth, or were in the process of developing them. 

· All five districts used their measures of teacher effectiveness in some human resource policies. For example, four districts used effectiveness information in performance pay initiatives.

· Three of the five districts had policies that targeted high‐need schools, drawing on effectiveness information. 

· All three offered financial incentives to teachers to move to or stay in high‐need schools.

· One district had hiring and transfer policies designed to provide principals in high‐need schools additional opportunities to hire effective teachers.

· The five districts’ efforts suggest a number of key challenges that other districts and states may need to address as they consider using measures of teacher effectiveness.  For example, interviewees noted challenges in implementing classroom observation systems that were both rigorous and manageable in terms of scheduling complexity and time required.

# Measures Used to identify Effective Teachers and Associated Challenges 

**As of July 2010, the five study districts had developed measures of teacher effectiveness that drew on student achievement data; four also had measures of classroom practice.**

While the reasons for developing the measures varied, the adoption of performance incentives was a key driver in four of the five districts.  Funding for performance incentives or for the development of the measures came from different sources at different times.  Eagle County’s efforts began with local funds which were supplemented later with TIF funds.  As of summer 2010, Hamilton County, Columbus, and Hillsborough planned to continue their work to develop and refine measures of teacher effectiveness as part of the states’ Race to the Top grant efforts.

**Three of the main challenges associated with using the new measures of teacher effectiveness were:**

· **Keeping teachers and principals informed about new measures of teacher effectiveness.** Study districts allowed opportunities for staff input and provided clear and comprehensive information to teachers and principals in a variety of ways.  For example, three districts provided opportunities for teachers or others to help develop or refine measures like classroom observation frameworks. 

· **Having limited data on student achievement growth.   Data were available only for teachers in grades and subjects in which state tests were implemented.**Study districts used different approaches to supplement these measures, including creating or repurposing other district assessments, or applying school-wide or other aggregate measures to teachers in untested grades or subjects.

· **Implementing classroom observation systems that were both rigorous and manageable.**Interviewees noted challenges in ensuring reliability and finding accomplished educators who could serve as observers.

# Use of Effectiveness Data in Human Resource Policies

The five study districts had developed policies for using effectiveness information in their human resource policies.  Across the districts, there were policies or programs to address the entire continuum of teacher employment and development, but districts focused most on the following:

# 

· **Compensation initiatives.**  All study districts except Hamilton County had in place performance pay initiatives that made use of teacher effectiveness measures.  The districts reported that these initiatives often served as the impetus to design or redesign teacher effectiveness measures.  Specifically, Columbus, Eagle County, Hillsborough and Houston all developed or improved their measures of teacher effectiveness in order to offer performance incentives for high-performing teachers districtwide or in select schools.

· **Feedback through observation.**When study districts adopted new or revised observation frameworks, the new/revised frameworks appeared to help observers and administrators provide feedback to teachers in order to help them to improve their instructional practices.  The format of the observations and feedback varied from district to district.

· **Career paths.** Several interviewees spoke about their efforts to use effectiveness information to identify teachers for leadership positions, as well as to release those they determined to be ineffective.  Houston reported using value-added data as a potential source of evidence for dismissal and for granting leadership opportunities. Columbus noted how observational data could be used for identifying potential teacher leaders.

# Specific Efforts to Make the  Distribution of Effective Teachers More Equitable

**Three of the five districts used information about teacher effectiveness to make the distribution of effective teachers more equitable by identifying the most competent teachers and offering them extra pay to teach in high-need schools.**

National Board Certified Teachers (NBCTs) in Hillsborough County received an additional $4,500 for teaching at a Renaissance School (that is, a school with 90 percent or more high-poverty students).  The Houston Independent School District analyzed effectiveness information to pinpoint inequities.  Houston also had an “Effective Teacher Pipeline” project that provided monetary and nonmonetary incentives for effective teachers to work in high-need schools.  The program encouraged movement of many effective teachers to a small set of high-priority, high-need schools.