Skip to content
September 7, 2011 / compassioninpolitics

Do the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET) Methodology Measure Up?

Is the system too draconian or bureucratic?
The system should seek a middle ground in terms of making teachers jump through too many hoops versus not enough parameters. The program should be implemented without adding substantial, unnecessary work for administrators, principals or teachers. To be most effective, the program should be jointly governed by a team of teachers and administrators – input is crucial.

Does the system have buy in from teachers?
In a performance-based pay system the principal needs to be very involved in all the processes and open to the idea of working under a distributed leadership model. Their buy-in, support and knowledge of the system are critical to success.

Do they like the system?
Performance-pay systems cannot be imposed on teachers without their consent if they are to be successful and sustainable.
If they are to succeed, they need to
• Include teachers, administrators and other key stakeholders in all stages of the development,
implementation and evaluation of the plan.
• Have an affirmative faculty vote to support the effort before beginning implementations.

Who credentializes the evaluators? What makes them experts as teachers, evaluators, and coaches?
Master and mentor teachers and coaches are expert instructional leaders with extensive knowledge of teaching practices. They have the ability to facilitate adult learning and coach teachers toward instructional improvement. These skills are critical to their success in developing professional learning communities, working with the principal to set academic goals and strategies, and coaching other teachers.

What establishes the National Institutes for Excellence in Teachings standards as consistent as “a valid measure on student academic growth? What research do they use to show a relationship between their rubric to student learning outcomes? Is that fair for students and teachers?
It is only when educational practitioners–teachers as well as school and school system administrators–have a clear understanding of how they effect their students in the classroom that they can make informed decisions about what to change and what to maintain. Linking student outcomes to school, school system, and teacher effects can provide this invaluable information. (Sanders Horn, TVASS, p.255)

Will teachers want to teach in the system?
The model should make it more likely that schools will be able to recruit qualified individuals into highneed fields like math, science and special education — or whatever a given district’s most pressing needs may be.

What is the independent evaluation of their rubric, model, and process based on? What research justifies their model? Is there a wide range of competing research conclusions?
Independent external evaluation of the system and its impact is also essential.

Does the rubic and methodology sync with the National Institute for Excellence in Teachings own research bibliography?
Link to the National Institute for Excellence in Teachings research bibliography.

Is is their system based on research from the National Center on Performance Incentives?
National Center for Performance Incentives

How does the National Institute for Teaching Excellence Methodology compare with other methodologies at the National Center on Performance Incentives and the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality?
National Center for Performance Incentives and the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality and the Center for Educator Compensation Reform

How can the experience in New York, Texas, and Round rock better inform our evaluation of the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching Methodology?
Research at the National Center for Performance Incentives

How can the experience in MN inform our decisions about the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching?
See below

Does the Q-Comp model of evaluation work?

Q Comp’s effect on student achievement cannot be measured using existing data, the report said. The Minnesota Department of Education does not provide regular oversight, the report said.


Is the Q-Comp model of evaluation even ready to apply to education classrooms?

Q Comp is a relatively new initiative. Only 11 school districts and charter schools have participated in the program for three years or more. As a result, there is a limited amount of data available to assess student achievement in Q Comp districts and schools.

School districts and charter schools choose whether to participate in Q Comp. The program’s voluntary nature, however, makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the program. School districts and charter schools that have implemented Q Comp are likely different than those that do not participate in the program. Even if one could show that changes in teacher retention or student achievement were attributable to Q Comp, it is not clear that similar changes would occur if Q Comp were implemented in other districts or schools. (Link)

Furthermore, it is difficult to disentangle the effects of Q Comp on student achievement from other initiatives in a school. Any changes in student standardized test scores could be due partly or entirely to the effects of other programs.

Finally, research on the relationship between student achievement and alternative teacher compensation models similar to Q Comp has not demonstrated a conclusive link.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: