![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
The Collaborative Project (CP) began as a pilot project in five North Carolina school districts in 2007 featuring a performance incentive initiative for teachers and administrators. The objective of this study was to document principals’ perceptions of the performance incentive initiative to determine challenges encountered during implementation. The researcher used a qualitative interview process to collect data from participating principals employed in the CP districts. The principals’ responses were analyzed and tables were constructed to show the responses for each question. For triangulation purposes, the results were compared with survey data from a 2009 evaluation completed by the Carolina Institute for Public Policy. Overall, the majority of principals interviewed believed that some components of the teacher performance incentive criteria helped their schools. The interview process revealed some unanticipated results not mentioned in the literature review and the results of the study provided insight into anomalies encountered during implementation.
References
|
Baber, A. (2007, June). Teacher evaluation in diversified teacher compensation systems. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Google Scholar | |
|
Center for Teaching Quality . (2007, March). Performance pay for teachers: Designing a system that students deserve. Hillsborough, NC: Author. Google Scholar | |
|
The Forum . (n.d.). About the collaborative. Retrieved from http://www.ncforum.org/initiatives/collaborativeproject.aspx Google Scholar | |
|
Gratz, D. B. (2010). Looming questions in performance pay. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(8), 16-21. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Harris, D. C. (2007, April). The promises and pitfalls of alternative teacher compensation approaches. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Google Scholar | |
|
Kaufmann, J. (2007, June). Student performance assessment in diversified teacher compensation systems. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Google Scholar | |
|
Koppich, J. E. (2010). Teacher unions and new forms of teacher compensation. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(8), 22-26. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
LeFevre, A. T. (2001, July). The merits of paying teachers for performance. Retrieved from American Legislative Exchange Council Web site: http://www.alec.org/2/1/talking-points/8.html Google Scholar | |
|
Martin, A. (2007, June). The use of diversified compensation systems to address equitable teacher distribution. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Google Scholar | |
|
Odden, A., Kelley, C. (2002). Paying teachers for what they know and do. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Olson, L. (2007, September 27). Merit-pay debate continues. Teacher Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.teachermagazine.org/tm/news/profession/2007/09/27/ew_meritpay_web.h19.html Google Scholar | |
|
Palumbo, C. (2007, June). Funding diversified teacher compensation systems. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Google Scholar | |
|
Perkins-Gough, D. (2007). Teachers weigh in on performance pay. Educational Leadership, 65, 83-85. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Podgursky, M. J., Springer, M. G. (2007). Teacher performance pay: A review. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26, 909-949. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Thompson, C. L., Henry, G. T., Smith, A., Kershaw, D. C., Zulli, R. A., Purtell, K. (2010). The impact of the first two years of the Collaborative Project: An interim assessment. Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Institute for Public Policy. Google Scholar | |
|
Wallis, C. (2008, February 25). How to make great teachers. Time, 171(8), 28-34. Google Scholar |
