Presentation of the Teacher Advancement Program by Lewis C. Solmon Senior Vice President and

Presentation of the Teacher Advancement Program

by

Lewis C. Solmon

Senior Vice President and

Director of Teacher Advancement Program

Milken Family Foundation

November 21, 2002

Presentation of the Teacher Advancement Program

by

Lewis C. Solmon

Senior Vice President and

Director of Teacher Advancement Program

Milken Family Foundation

November 21, 2002

National Conference on

Teacher Compensation and Evaluation

National Conference on

Teacher Compensation and Evaluation

Any new teacher hired must meet the requirements of a “highly qualified” teacher.

States must establish a plan to ensure that by the end of 2005-06 all teachers in core academic subjects must be highly qualified. The plan must include annual measurable increases towards the goal.

States and districts must begin to report progress toward ensuring all teachers are highly qualified by 2005-06.

Any new teacher hired must meet the requirements of a “highly qualified” teacher.

States must establish a plan to ensure that by the end of 2005-06 all teachers in core academic subjects must be highly qualified. The plan must include annual measurable increases towards the goal.

States and districts must begin to report progress toward ensuring all teachers are highly qualified by 2005-06.

NCLB: Qualifications for Teachers

NCLB: “Highly Qualified”NCLB: “Highly Qualified”

Fully licensed or certified No waivers or emergency credentials At least a bachelor’s degree Demonstrated subject matter

knowledge though state test Teaching skills also demonstrated

through state test (elementary)

Nothing Matters More Than a Quality TeacherNothing Matters More Than a Quality Teacher

Rivers longitudinal work found that average achieving students assigned to 4 years of ineffective teachers had only a 40 percent chance of passing the Tennessee high school exit examination. The same students assigned to 4 years of effective teachers had an 80 percent chance of passing.

Rivers longitudinal work found that average achieving students assigned to 4 years of ineffective teachers had only a 40 percent chance of passing the Tennessee high school exit examination. The same students assigned to 4 years of effective teachers had an 80 percent chance of passing.

Why Don’t People Choose Teaching?Why Don’t People Choose Teaching?

Salaries not competitive

Costs of training not warranted by salary

Women have more career opportunities now

Little collegiality

Little respect from community

Often unpleasant, dangerous environment

Everyone gets same pay

Salaries not competitive

Costs of training not warranted by salary

Women have more career opportunities now

Little collegiality

Little respect from community

Often unpleasant, dangerous environment

Everyone gets same pay

Teachers Who LeaveTeachers Who Leave

20% of teachers leave within 3 years

50% of urban school teachers leave within 5 years

Twice as likely to leave with no induction program

Twice as likely to leave with top scores on high- stakes exams

20% of teachers leave within 3 years

50% of urban school teachers leave within 5 years

Twice as likely to leave with no induction program

Twice as likely to leave with top scores on high- stakes exams

Teacher Quality EffortsTeacher Quality Efforts

Past EffortsPast Efforts New IdeasNew Ideas

New Ways to Attract TeachersNew Ways to Attract TeachersNew Ways to Attract TeachersNew Ways to Attract Teachers

Increase Salaries

School Debt Forgiveness

Housing Subsidies

Perks

PR Campaign

New Recruitment Strategies

Accelerated Teacher Education

More Rigorous Training

Increase Salaries

School Debt Forgiveness

Housing Subsidies

Perks

PR Campaign

New Recruitment Strategies

Accelerated Teacher Education

More Rigorous Training

small

isolated efforts

not school-centered

poorly designed

poorly implemented

rather than systemic reforms

solve one problem only to create another

small

isolated efforts

not school-centered

poorly designed

poorly implemented

rather than systemic reforms

solve one problem only to create another

Drawbacks to Programs for Attracting & Retaining High Quality TeachersDrawbacks to Programs for Attracting & Retaining High Quality Teachers

Teacher Advancement Program (TAP)

GOAL OF TAP:Increased Student Achievement

METHOD FOR GETTING THERE:Maximize Teacher Quality

HOW TO DO THAT:Comprehensive Reform to Attract, Motivate and

Retain High Quality Teachers

TAP is a Comprehensive Reform

ELEMENTS OF THAT REFORM:

1. Multiple Career Paths

2. Market-Driven Compensation

3. Performance-Based Accountability

4. Ongoing, Applied Professional Growth

5. Expanding the Supply of High Quality Educators

NOTE: Schools can implement TAP in conjunction with: Effective curricula New management methods Community involvement initiatives, etc.

Teacher Advancement ProgramTeacher Advancement ProgramTeacher Advancement ProgramTeacher Advancement Program

Initial academic degree and teaching certification attainable in four years

Alternative certification through assessments and classroom demonstration

Outstanding retired teachers continue working on a part-time basis as faculty fellows

Multi-state credentialing

Portable, private pension plans

Opportunity for national certification

Initial academic degree and teaching certification attainable in four years

Alternative certification through assessments and classroom demonstration

Outstanding retired teachers continue working on a part-time basis as faculty fellows

Multi-state credentialing

Portable, private pension plans

Opportunity for national certification

The expansion of the pool is achieved by:The expansion of the pool is achieved by:

TAP – Both Old and NewTAP – Both Old and New

Multiple Career Paths Career Ladders

Performance Pay Odden, Denver, Cincinnati

Assessment Sanders, Danielson, NBPTS

Professional ???Development

Expanding the Pool N.J. Alt. Cert, Troops to Teaches, Teach

for America

Multiple Career Paths Career Ladders

Performance Pay Odden, Denver, Cincinnati

Assessment Sanders, Danielson, NBPTS

Professional ???Development

Expanding the Pool N.J. Alt. Cert, Troops to Teaches, Teach

for AmericaTAP is unique because it ties both teacher performance assessment & student value added to teacher compensation & supports that with a unique professional development program.

TAP is unique because it ties both teacher performance assessment & student value added to teacher compensation & supports that with a unique professional development program.

Models for the Teaching Profession: Career AdvancementModels for the Teaching Profession: Career Advancement

Traditional ModelTraditional Model TAP ModelTAP Model

Single Career PathTeacher Position Only

Requiring the same level of:• professional qualifications• responsibility• authority• assessment rigor

Single Career PathTeacher Position Only

Requiring the same level of:• professional qualifications• responsibility• authority• assessment rigor

Multiple Career PathsSenior, Mentor & Master Positions

Requiring increasing levels of:• professional qualifications• responsibilities• authority• assessment rigor

Multiple Career PathsSenior, Mentor & Master Positions

Requiring increasing levels of:• professional qualifications• responsibilities• authority• assessment rigor

Improving Teacher Quality and Career AdvancementImproving Teacher Quality and Career Advancement

Currently, significant career advancement in the teaching profession requires moving out of the classroom and out of teaching.

Currently, significant career advancement in the teaching profession requires moving out of the classroom and out of teaching.

Models for the Teaching Profession: CompensationModels for the Teaching Profession: Compensation


Salary Schedule Drives Compensation

Lock-step salary determined only by years of

experience and training units accrued

Salary Schedule Drives Compensation

Lock-step salary determined only by years of

experience and training units accrued

Performance and Responsibility Drive

Compensation

Salary determined by level of responsibilities and effectiveness of performance

Performance and Responsibility Drive

Compensation

Salary determined by level of responsibilities and effectiveness of performance

Teacher Advancement ProgramTeacher Advancement ProgramTeacher Advancement ProgramTeacher Advancement Program

If the teacher’s primary field is difficult to staff, and if the teacher is in a hard-to-staff school

Higher teacher training levels and relevant degrees

Excellent teacher performance, as judged by experts

Different functions/additional duties

High student achievement

If the teacher’s primary field is difficult to staff, and if the teacher is in a hard-to-staff school

Higher teacher training levels and relevant degrees

Excellent teacher performance, as judged by experts

Different functions/additional duties

High student achievement

Higher pay is granted for the following:Higher pay is granted for the following:

Other plans reject pay based onOther plans reject pay based onOther plans reject pay based onOther plans reject pay based on

Judgment of others

Student achievement/ test scores

Subject specialty

Judgment of others

Student achievement/ test scores

Subject specialty

How TAP Compensation System Has EvolvedHow TAP Compensation System Has Evolved

Performance awards bonus earned each year. not cumulative constrained by available funds augment salaries by $5,000 or less. supplements traditional step & column scale.

No one earns less than in traditional compensation system, even for poor performance.

Opportunity for all teachers to get a bonus of some amount. NOT: only the top X% will receive bonuses.

Bonuses are criterion referenced, not relative. Any teacher who meets a standard receives the bonus.

Performance awards bonus earned each year. not cumulative constrained by available funds augment salaries by $5,000 or less. supplements traditional step & column scale.

No one earns less than in traditional compensation system, even for poor performance.

Opportunity for all teachers to get a bonus of some amount. NOT: only the top X% will receive bonuses.

Bonuses are criterion referenced, not relative. Any teacher who meets a standard receives the bonus.

50% of the bonus is awarded for skills and knowledge. 50% is based upon student achievement (value-added):

30% school-wide for all teachers 20% based on achievement of individual teacher’s

students

Teachers who score well on skills and can earn bonuses even if students’ scores do not improve.

If teachers work more days, they must get paid for them at least at their former daily rate.

Since subject specific tests are often unavailable, the student achievement element of the bonus for high school teachers is complicated.

50% of the bonus is awarded for skills and knowledge. 50% is based upon student achievement (value-added):

30% school-wide for all teachers 20% based on achievement of individual teacher’s

students

Teachers who score well on skills and can earn bonuses even if students’ scores do not improve.

If teachers work more days, they must get paid for them at least at their former daily rate.

Since subject specific tests are often unavailable, the student achievement element of the bonus for high school teachers is complicated.

How TAP Compensation System Has EvolvedHow TAP Compensation System Has Evolved

Models for the Teaching Profession: Professional AccountabilityModels for the Teaching Profession: Professional Accountability

Traditional ModelTraditional Model

Uneven Accountability

• Idiosyncratic evaluation standards & procedures

• Rewards and sanction unrelated to evaluation outcomes

• Support provided for deficiencies only

Uneven Accountability

• Idiosyncratic evaluation standards & procedures

• Rewards and sanction unrelated to evaluation outcomes

• Support provided for deficiencies only

TAP ModelTAP Model

Performance-based Accountability

• TAP standards, procedures and performance rubrics

• Hiring, advancement and compensation tied to evaluation

• Support provided for growth

Performance-based Accountability

• TAP standards, procedures and performance rubrics

• Hiring, advancement and compensation tied to evaluation

• Support provided for growth

Past Teacher Accountability Versus TAP Teacher Accountability Efforts

Past EffortsPast Efforts TAPTAP

Checklist of Teaching Behaviors

Two Performance Levels

Evaluation Excludes Student Achievement

One Evaluator

Evaluation Supports Deficiencies Only

Performance Independent of Compensation

Checklist of Teaching Behaviors

Two Performance Levels

Evaluation Excludes Student Achievement

One Evaluator

Evaluation Supports Deficiencies Only

Performance Independent of Compensation

Teaching Performance Standards

Five Performance Levels

Evaluation Includes School and Classroom Achievement

Multiple Evaluators

Evaluation Supports Professional Growth

Performance Tied to Compensation

Teaching Performance Standards

Five Performance Levels

Evaluation Includes School and Classroom Achievement

Multiple Evaluators

Evaluation Supports Professional Growth

Performance Tied to Compensation

TAP Performance-Based Accountability SummaryTAP Performance-Based Accountability Summary

R esponsib ility S tandards

C lassroom Environm entPerform ance S tandards

Im plem enting InstructionPerform ance S tandards

D esigning and P lanningPerform ance S tandards

Teacher Skills,Know ledge, andResponsibilities

Perform anceAssessm ents

Standards-basedcontent tests

Standard izedTests

Classroom- levelAchievem ent Gains

Standards-basedcontent tests

Standard izedTests

SchoolAchievem ent Gains

Perform ance Indicators

Measuring Classroom and School Wide Value-Added AchievementMeasuring Classroom and School Wide Value-Added Achievement

Base decisions on value-added gains

Use the TAP value-added statistical model

Set leveled criteria for school gains and classroom gains (13%, 8%, 4%, YearsGrowth, Negative gain)

Test every year

Use reliable and valid tests

Tie student level data to teacher each year

Base decisions on value-added gains

Use the TAP value-added statistical model

Set leveled criteria for school gains and classroom gains (13%, 8%, 4%, YearsGrowth, Negative gain)

Test every year

Use reliable and valid tests

Tie student level data to teacher each year

Models for the Teaching Profession: Professional GrowthModels for the Teaching Profession: Professional Growth


Inservice/Course-based Professional Development

• Individual commitment, intermittent activities

• Goals and activities tied to personal and financial interests of the individual

• Unconnected to evaluation

Inservice/Course-based Professional Development

• Individual commitment, intermittent activities

• Goals and activities tied to personal and financial interests of the individual

• Unconnected to evaluation

Ongoing Applied Professional Growth

• Schoolwide commitment, weekly, site-based, teacher lead activities

• Goals and activities tied to state standards, local SIP & analysis of student learning outcomes

• Used to support and reinforce evaluation growth goals

Ongoing Applied Professional Growth

• Schoolwide commitment, weekly, site-based, teacher lead activities

• Goals and activities tied to state standards, local SIP & analysis of student learning outcomes

• Used to support and reinforce evaluation growth goals

Current TAP Demonstration SitesCurrent TAP Demonstration Sites

Arizona 6 schools

South Carolina 7 schools

Colorado 5 schools (+3)

Arkansas 9 schools

Indiana Archdiocese 4 schools

Active consideration: Louisiana Florida Nevada Ohio

Arizona 6 schools

South Carolina 7 schools

Colorado 5 schools (+3)

Arkansas 9 schools

Indiana Archdiocese 4 schools

Active consideration: Louisiana Florida Nevada Ohio

Unions accepting TAPUnions accepting TAP

“Bottom up” not “top down”

Involves teachers at every step

Require >75% of faculty vote

TAP seen as fair

Does not replace traditional salary schedule

Any teacher who qualifies can get award

Implement slowly, gain confidence of teachers

TAP is a whole program

“Bottom up” not “top down”

Involves teachers at every step

Require >75% of faculty vote

TAP seen as fair

Does not replace traditional salary schedule

Any teacher who qualifies can get award

Implement slowly, gain confidence of teachers

TAP is a whole program

The Cost of TAPThe Cost of TAP

Incremental costs = 6% of budget OR $400/student

No current teacher worse off

Salary supplements for Master & Mentor teachers

New teacher positions

New specialists hired

Senior teachers’ summer professional growth

Turnover savings not kept by school

Traditional salary schedule increases in place

Bonus pool must be > current certain raises

Incremental costs = 6% of budget OR $400/student

No current teacher worse off

Salary supplements for Master & Mentor teachers

New teacher positions

New specialists hired

Senior teachers’ summer professional growth

Turnover savings not kept by school

Traditional salary schedule increases in place

Bonus pool must be > current certain raises

New Sources of FundsNew Sources of Funds

Current district/school budgets

New state appropriations

Ballot initiatives

Private foundations

Federal Funds

Current district/school budgets

New state appropriations

Ballot initiatives

Private foundations

Federal Funds

Expected Final OutcomeExpected Final Outcome

Improved Student Achievement Improved Student Achievement

Data TAP Schools were matched to Controls based on: • Achievement , school size, % students receiving free lunch, configuration, and urban/rural classification4 TAP Schools

• 1,114 TAP Student 2000-2001• 1,277 TAP students 2001-2002

8 Comparison Schools• 2009 students 2000-2001• 1,372 students 2001-2002

2000 Baseline Data TAP vs. Controls

41 3942

59

39 3741

64

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

TotalAchievement

ReadingAchievement

MathematicsAchievement

Percent Std.Free Lunch

TAP Schools Control Schools

Analyses• Value-added assessment

• Statistical model to measure growth in student achievement from pre-to-post-testing

• Each student must have 2 consecutive years of test data from a reliable and valid test

• Data needs to be linked to school, and ideally, teachers each year

Interpreting Results1. Gap Reduction

• each school is given an achievement target to reach, and their goal is to reduce the gap between their initial achievement and the target each year

2. Level of Certainty• Statistics involves the study of

probable occurrences• Whenever a statistical result is

reported, so too is the likelihood of achieving that result

Gap ReductionExample

If my school’s pretest was the 50th percentile rank and their posttest was the 55th percentile rank, they made a 5 percentile point gain.

Their gain to the target, however, would really be 14 percent, because the school has 35 percentile rank points to make up (85-50), and dividing 5 by 35 is .14, or 14 percent.

Level of Certainty

Level of CertaintyFor TAP teachers/schools we want to be at least 70 percent certain that their classroom achieved a gain.

• Teacher #1 achieved a gain under that criteria

• Teacher #2 did not

We use statistics to calculate a certainty level associated with the gain for each teacher and each school.

Research Question # 1

1.Do TAP schools improve student achievement on a yearly basis?

Research Conclusion 1

The average TAP school gain per year was 11.5 percent, or 23 percent to standard over two years.


2. Do TAP schools outperform comparable schools on a yearly basis?


Over the course of two years, TAP schools out-gained their controls by approximately 13 percent.


3. Do a greater proportion of teachers in TAP schools achieve student learning gains than teachers in comparable schools?

46 48

36 38

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2001 2002% o

f Te

ach

ers

Wh

ose

Cla

ssro

om

s A

chie

ved

Gai

ns

TAP Teachers Comparison School Teachers


In both 2001 and 2002, 10 percent more teachers in TAP schools compared to controls achieved student learning gains.


4. Does each individual TAP school outperform its comparable control schools?

Research Conclusion 4• In 2001, three of the four TAP schools gained significantly more in Reading, Language, and Math than their control schools. • In 2002, two of the four TAP schools gained significantly more in Reading, Language and Mathematics than their control schools.


5. Do TAP schools that strictly adhere to implementing the five TAP principles produce greater student achievement gains than TAP schools that implement the principles with less rigor?

TAP School Implementation Scores

90 87

147

94

144 140

020406080

100120140160

1 2 3 4 5 6

TAP School Number

Imp

lem

enat

ion

Sco

re


• Two of the three TAP schools (3 and 5) with rigorous implementation are attaining large achievement gains. • TAP School 3, the school with the highest implementation score, is out-gaining its control schools by 20 percent in the first year, and 31 percent in the second year, for a total of 51 percent in two years.

Research Conclusions1. All TAP schools posted achievement gains

in both years they implemented the reform.

2. TAP schools significantly out-gained similar comparison schools by a total of 13 percent over two years.

3. Significantly more TAP teachers’ classrooms’ achieved student-learning gains than teachers in control schools.

4. Schools that rigorously implemented TAP produced student achievement gains that were larger than TAP schools that only moderately implemented the reform, and much larger than control schools that did not implement TAP.

A Final Note

Although, all of the TAP schools realized student achievement gains in the first two years of the reform, the magnitude of those gains differed across schools (e.g. from an 11 percent gain to target to a 51 percent gain to target over two years).

A Final NoteStudies of comprehensive school reform show that the reform is more likely to be successful when:1. It is supported by teachers2. There is strong principal leadership3. There is a stable and committed district4. The schools receive on going assistance from developers5. The reform is implemented in smaller rather than larger schools

Intermediate OutcomesIntermediate Outcomes

Teachers opt for new system vs. existing system

Changes in types of individuals applying

Number of applicants

Differences in characteristics of people hired

Changes in teacher retention rates

Changes in which teachers stay in classroom

Survival rates in the first five years

Changing nature of collective bargaining

Stakeholder perceptions of staff quality & professionalism

Teacher satisfaction data

Teachers opt for new system vs. existing system

Changes in types of individuals applying

Number of applicants

Differences in characteristics of people hired

Changes in teacher retention rates

Changes in which teachers stay in classroom

Survival rates in the first five years

Changing nature of collective bargaining

Stakeholder perceptions of staff quality & professionalism

Teacher satisfaction data

The Stories We’ve HeardThe Stories We’ve Heard

New teachers have support unheard of in other schools and in the past.

Veteran teachers are leaving comfortable school environments to be at TAP schools (often lower SES).

Teachers are collaborating and communicating much more.

New teachers have support unheard of in other schools and in the past.

Veteran teachers are leaving comfortable school environments to be at TAP schools (often lower SES).

Teachers are collaborating and communicating much more.


Seeing a great deal of flexibility and change among teachers’ classroom practices.

Developing/studying the rubrics helps teachers learn about and implement effective classroom practices.

Immediate feedback from evaluations enables teachers to enhance their performance.

Seeing a great deal of flexibility and change among teachers’ classroom practices.

Developing/studying the rubrics helps teachers learn about and implement effective classroom practices.

Immediate feedback from evaluations enables teachers to enhance their performance.


Analyses of student test scores serves as guide for individualized instruction.

Teachers are working harder than ever before, but a lot better.

Professional growth at the school site on a regular basis sends an affirming message to teachers that their development is important.

Analyses of student test scores serves as guide for individualized instruction.

Teachers are working harder than ever before, but a lot better.

Professional growth at the school site on a regular basis sends an affirming message to teachers that their development is important.

TAP is the BEST SolutionTAP is the BEST Solution

Systemic program Systemic program

Strong induction program Strong induction program

Excellent & relevant professional growth

Excellent & relevant professional growth

Fair & understandable assessment system

Fair & understandable assessment system


Increased responsibility & leadership Increased responsibility & leadership

Involves teachers at every step Involves teachers at every step

Gains teacher support for making change Gains teacher support for making change

Commensurate compensation Commensurate compensation

WITHOUT fully leaving classroom WITHOUT fully leaving classroom


Anticipates high individual rewards Anticipates high individual rewards

Pays well for teaching well Pays well for teaching well

Teachers, in part, evaluated by what students learn.

Peer evaluation is fair and honest

Teachers, in part, evaluated by what students learn.

Peer evaluation is fair and honest

www.mff.org/tapwww.mff.org/tap [email protected]@mff.org

Research Questions1. Do TAP schools improve student

achievement on a yearly basis?2. Do TAP schools outperform comparable

schools on a yearly basis? 3. Do a greater proportion of teachers in TAP

schools achieve student learning gains than teachers in comparable schools?

4. Does each individual TAP school outperform its comparable control schools?

5. Do TAP schools that strictly adhere to implementing the five TAP principles produce greater student achievement gains than TAP schools that implement the principles with less rigor?

Demanding one uniform gain for every student irrespective of where they start is unfair• When you start at the 80th percentile it is more

difficult to make -- say 10 percentile rank gain-- than someone who started at the 50th percentile

Demanding that a student makes up the distance from where they start to a target each year takes into account every student’s initial status, making the gain relative to a starting point

We set the target at the 85th percentile rank (primarily for statistical reasons relating to the test’s scale)

Gap Reduction

Remember

1. TAP’s value-added assessment is a GAP REDUCTION MODEL

2. There is always probability associated with achievement gains

Interpreting MFF Productivity Profiles1. Vertical axis is the

certainty level

2. Horizontal axis is the percent gain to standard (e.g. 85th percentile rank)

3. 70 percent certainty line

4. School growth curves

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

2000-2001

TAP School 1

TAP School 4

TAP School 3

TAP School 2

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

2001-2002

1

4

3

2

56

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 4.8% Gain

2000-2001

TAP Schools

70% Confident

of 11.0% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 5.2% Gain

2001-2002

TAP Schools

70% Confident

of 12.0% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control School

70% Confident

of 9.5% Gain

2000-2001

TAP School 1

70% Confident

of 12.7% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 0% Gain

2000-2001

TAP School 2

70% Confident

of 4.8% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 8.5% Gain

2000-2001

TAP School 3

70% Confident

of 25% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 6.0% Gain

2000-2001

TAP School 4

70% Confident

of 8.0% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 11.5% Gain

2001-2002Implementation: 38

TAP School 1

70% Confident

of 13.0% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 1.6% Gain


TAP School 2

70% Confident

of 6.4% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

de

nce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 0.0% Gain


TAP School 3

70% Confident

of 31% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

Control Schools

70% Confident

of 13% Gain


TAP School 4

70% Confident

of 2.7% Gain

0 10 20 30 40 50

% Gain

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Co

nfi

den

ce

2001-2002

1

4

3

2

56

Presentation of the Teacher Advancement Program by Lewis C. Solmon Senior Vice President and

Documents

Transcript of Presentation of the Teacher Advancement Program by Lewis C. Solmon Senior Vice President and