Issue 23: April 2009

Q Comp: Two Evaluations that Lead to More Questions
by Eric Wong

Recently, the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) and the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor (OLA) released their findings on Q Comp, a voluntary alternative teacher compensation program, and the progress it has made on achieving its goal of better educational outcomes.  It is clear from both reports that while there is disagreement on the progress made, more data and evaluation will be needed before any comprehensive conclusions can be made.

Q Comp began in 2005 and uses performance-based pay, alternative teacher salary structures, on-the-job professional development, teacher evaluations and additional career opportunities in order to improve student learning outcomes. As of January 2009, 44 school districts and 28 charter schools that serve 255,232 students participate in the program.    Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty proposes to increase funding for Q Comp in order to mandate implementation to the state’s 340 districts and 140 charter schools.

MDE’s evaluation report , produced by Hezel Associates, found the following major conclusions:

• The perception of Q Comp’s impact within participating school districts and charter schools has been quite positive
• Teachers in participating school districts and charter schools seem to be supportive in their role to improve student’s educational achievement since Q Comp’s inception, compared to non-Q Comp teachers.  However, there is no statistical link between these trends.
• Teachers, mentors, and coaches share a common view that the financial gains behind Q Comp are not a driving motivator for teachers participating in the program as compared to district participation.
• There is a significant and positive relationship between the number of years a school has been implementing Q Comp and student achievement

Shortly after the release of the MDE’s report, the OLA released a report that found that Q Comp’s effect on student achievement cannot be adequately measured using existing data.  Furthermore, the OLA had the following findings regarding Q Comp:

• Both administrators and teachers have more favorable opinions about the professional development component of Q Comp than the salary and performance pay components of the program.
• Reluctance among teachers and concerns about the stability of funding or future funding for Q Comp were the most frequently cited reasons for schools not to apply to the program.
• Although the MDE’s Q Comp application approval decisions have been reasonable, applicants have been held to different standards depending on when they applied to the program.
• The current 30-day timeline for application decisions has compromised the quality of MDE's application reviews.
• Not all Q Comp participants are subject to regular oversight by MDE.

MDE has stated that it agreed with most of the OLA’s recommendations on improve Q Comp administration and oversight.

It is evident from these evaluation reports that data collection methods and evaluation design are utterly important when conducting evaluations, particularly in education policy.  For example, Hezel Associates stated that their evaluation used an extensive mixed-methods approach that included focus groups, surveys, comparative case studies and student performance data from students, teachers, school administrators and stakeholders in the broader community.  Similarly, the OLA used site observations, interviews and surveys primarily to teachers and administrators.  The findings of these reports were strongly influenced by how the data is collected and by the overall evaluation design.  

Therefore, while these two evaluation reports dispute the effectiveness of Q Comp in improving student learning outcomes, it is clear that mixed methods approaches should be used whenever possible when addressing evaluation questions.  Using mixed-methods provides multiple perspectives on evaluating issues which strengthens the findings when debating and implementing policy options.

Resources for this article can be found at:

Minnesota Department of Education, “Q Comp: Improving Student Achievement – Strengthening Teacher Effectiveness.”  February 2009. http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/Communications/documents/Report/036791.pdf

Hezel Associates, “Quality Compensation for Teachers Summative Evaluation.” January 30, 2009. http://education.state.mn.us/mdeprod/groups/Communications/documents/Report/036790.pdf

Office of the Legislative Auditor, “Q Comp: Quality Compensation for Teachers.” February 3, 2009. http://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/ped/2009/qcomp.htm

Upcoming Grants and Requests for Proposals
by Susan Murphy

Today is Earth Day and I am pleased to send you this paper-free e-newsletter article on grants and RFPs that help us to preserve and protect our planet.   It is hard to remember a time when there wasn’t an Earth Day, but actually it started in the sixties through observations made during an energy conservation tour in John F. Kennedy’s presidency.  To learn more about Earth Day click here for an article by Senator Gaylord Nelson who is credited as the founder. Read on to learn about funding opportunities that give our Earth a brighter future.

Community: “The mission of the Irwin Andrew Porter Foundation (IAP) is to fund innovative projects that foster connections between individuals, communities, the environment and the world at large.” They look for innovation, effectiveness, inspiration and heart in program applications submitted fostering community connectedness. The IAP Foundation’s funding area is regional and restricted to considering projects within Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin. Grants range from $500 to $30,000 annually with the summer round applications due by June 1, 2009. For the Foundation guidelines go to: http://www.iapfoundation.org/?q=apply/guidelines.

Animal Welfare: One of The Build a Bear Workshop grant opportunities is Bearemy's Kennel Pals®grants.  Money is awarded four times a year for direct support to programs for “animals in domestic pet programs including animal welfare organizations, pet rescue and rehabilitation organizations, and therapeutic and humane education pet programs.”  You must be a tax-exempt organization to apply.  Grants usually range between $1,000 and $10,000.  Grants are reviewed quarterly with the next deadline being the end of June 2009. Click here for an online application.

Environmental Contest:  Student Conservation Association presents a Green Your School Contest for High School students to submit projects that began by August of 2008 that work to “improve or restore or beautify or conserve their high school environment.” Projects are graded on sustainability, initiation by students, involvement with the community and the impact on the environmental health of the school. Submissions are currently being accepted now through October 19, 2009. One grand prize winner will receive $5,000 and two runners-up will get $2,500.  For more information go to: http://www.thesca.org/green-your-school.