Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program

Pay-for-Performance: Key Questions and Lessons from Five Current Models

Kelly Scott
9.5.2001

Education Commission of the States
June 2001

Although it's accepted with little question in many other lines of work, in education there's much resistance to compensating people based on their job performance. As bullets whiz overhead, however, some states and districts are implementing performance-pay plans in an effort to jumpstart pupil achievement and halt the stream of top-notch teachers exiting the classroom for greener employment pastures. Earlier this year, the Education Commission of the States assembled representatives from five leading pay-for-performance locales-Cincinnati; Denver; Douglas County, CO; Iowa; and the Milken Family Foundation's Teacher Advancement Program (in Arizona)-to pool their insights and determine what lessons their experiences could yield for other states and districts. A recent ECS Issue Paper offers an overview of the meeting's findings, including an explanation of key issues involved in implementing performance-based pay in schools, a summary of questions policymakers ought to consider, a brief discussion of lessons learned (even though some programs have yet to become operational), a chart comparing the five programs, a summary of each program's structure, and a reference guide. The paper doesn't hold any surprises, but it does present a sound, if cursory, treatment of a nettlesome issue. It's available at http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/28/30/2830.htm or by contacting ECS at 707 17th Street, Suite 2700, Denver, CO 80202-3427; 303-299-3600; fax 303-296-8332.

Tags: Arizona Cincinnati Colorado Denver Education Commission of the States Iowa
+1 More Show Less
Kelly Scott
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]