If I'm understanding this correctly, doesn't it also act as an incentive to fail one of the HSA tests first so the student can qualify to "improve" and pocket the money?

J -- No, the only kids eligible for the incentive money are the 5,000 or so who have already failed at least one test. If the system keeps offering incentives to future classes, the scenario you envision could be a possibility, but not for now.

This is ridiculous.... What is this teaching them? That they get rewarded for doing what they were supposed to be doing in the first place? That if you don't do the bare minimum, then eventually, someone will come along and give you a handout for putting in the least amount of effort? Great plan.

Ahh, thank you for the clarification - for a minute I thought a whole new can of worms was about to pop open! There is one side of me that thinks "hey, whatever works", but I also think that it's sending the wrong message. It's a shame that we have to offer an incentive outside of the pleasure of doing well.

Reward them handsomely for passing it the first time. Lower the reward over the next two tries.

Sara,

So this isn't for any kids beyond the 5,000 who've already failed one test? What about future kids who fail? Are we establishing a permanent incentive here? Thanks,

Corey

Corey, it's a one-time pot of money, so for the moment, yes, it's only applicable to the 5,000 who have already failed one test. It's not yet a permanent incentive.

I like bold risks, but, as a teacher, it disappoints me that $1 million is being used for this. That's 20 teacher salaries. Get my class sizes below 35 by hiring more teachers, and more kids will pass the HSA.

I also just don't see $110 as a great incentive to kids if a high school diploma isn't already an incentive enough.

I'm going to post my comments from the other forum, but I have much more confidence in those that read this section than the other. I really believe that InsideEd brings some great perspectives. On that note, these comments are/were not directed to this crowd. I'll edit some things out because they are not appropriate here. I was very frustrated after reading other comments so please ignore the tone.

Also, before I go on, "steegness" - fantastic comment. Very interesting perspective.

Onwards:

1) Have any of you "above" ever offered a child - or were offered yourself - some reward from a parent guardian for doing well in school? Have you ever been offered a bonus or a reward at work? We see bonus incentives used ALL the time in private industry. In fact, private industry glamorizes the concept of bonus for performance (see: http://www.abovethelaw.com/2008/01/associate_... )

2) This money could not go towards anything else - it is an EARMARKED FUND. These are FEDERAL dollars, not state, not city. MSDE is in charge of overseeing the money and the local district is in charge of implementation, but the money was guaranteed only for HSA recovery under a Title I umbrella. see: http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg2... )

3) Tell me what you would rather:(1) a marginally increasing population without a high school degree - necessitating billions spent through the criminal justice, correctional system, drug rehab, et al programs OR (2) a fractional expenditure now on preventative policies that will diminish future social spending. The spending will happen one way or another. I know some college grads out there will argue present value arguments, but 6 million now will not reach the billions for later. For those of you confused, please reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_value

5) If you did some research... THIS PLAN DOES REWARD THE HIGH ACHIEVERS - successful students will now have an opportunity to get paid to tutor struggling students. We're hitting multiple benefits here - socially, economically, and psychologically.

Why are we paying the kids to do something they should already be doing? One student is already quoted as saying "I'd pass classes all day and attend them too". We're giving them money they don't deserve - it's another hand out - why not expand it to the entire state? Why just Balto City?

Honestly, I agree with most people--why should they be rewarded for something they should be required to do?
And for those that believe it would significantly change everything, I think that is putting a lot of stock into $100. Studying for those takes time and effort, something that somebody who is looking to make an easy $100 wouldn't be willing to do.
Maybe it will help that marginal few that came close on the first try to open up their study materials a few more times. But those kids who have been missing school since 2nd grade and were pushed through the system, I doubt it would help them at all.

Hey Bill,

1) What is the relationship between 'private industry' and public education? The last time I checked, private companies don't excuse excessive latenesses, absences, or accept notes from your parents!

2) The money is from an EARMARKED FUND, so let's just spend it--same logic Halliburton and government contractors used--I love it!

3) So are you assuming that students who've failed an HSA would not be motivated enough to eventually pass it or complete the 'senior project,' is that correct?

4) You must have edited it out.

5) I have no problem with the tutoring, the rest just smells like desperation!

I agree with several of the posters in that the message sent by offering money is not a good one. At the same time, if it works to reach more students who have been repeatedly failing, it'd be ok by me.

I do think, though --even if it does work--, there would be things the money would be better spent on. Things that would work better, that would reach more students, that would send a positive message at the same time as bringing up hsa scores. Remember the money is earmarked not specifically for a monetary incentive program, but for hsa imporvement. Perhaps, as epiphinbalto suggested, hiring more teachers (who would specialize in hsa-study pullouts or after school programs). Perhaps just increase the $700,000 already being spent toward peer/college tutoring. I do like the part of this plan you mention, Bill, about successful students tutoring those who have failed the hsa, and I think a stronger emphasis on that would be more beneficial than the incentive payments.

I get it... is like the Super Fund that was established to help clean up the toxic waste sites. They establish a fund to clean up the mess cause by years of neglected middle schools with the hope that if they pay these failing students they will no longer make the system look bad.

I don't see paying students to do well on tests. Just seems kind of wrong.

The peer tutoring seems like a great idea. And why not hire more teachers or professionals to really tackle the education problem.

It will be interesting to see how this idea all plays out. I doubt money is really an effective incentive to motivate students to study.

My guess would be that most will not do much better on the tests and I imagine the number that earn the entire amount will be minimal at best.

Our Art and Education Group will be taking advantage of the confusion this story has caused. There are already students who are planning to fail the 10th grade biology hsa so they can get money. The students don't know that the money is only for the 5000 who already failed and not so far) for future failures.

So what we are doing now is designing posters to place around schools and bus stops that basically say, GET PAID! FAIL THE HSAs!

We will have three styles and get them printed in about 1000 total. We will use tack spray to post the bills all over the areas most likely for students to see the week before HSAs. We are now talking about how to recruit teachers and students to post these bills in the school bathrooms as well.

1000 bills of 11x14 in two colors (red and black are the best) will cost about $400 on cheap stock.

Our purpose is to drive down the scores for Baltimore on this next round of HSA tests coming at the end of the school year.

This will be so much fun....

Ephiphany,
You are correct that private industry offers incentives. The operative words is "for performance", not for failure. You see, in the private industry, it wouldn't be the bottom 2-3% that get the $$$, it would be the top 2-3% . It's only in the government sector where you see a penalty against the successful and a reward for not reaching the standard. In my industry, I have to meet expectatations, just to qualify for raise or bonus, if raises or bonuses are given that quarte, again based on performance.
Lastly, the money was not earmarked for incentives. It was earmarked to be used for improving results, but required approval from the state school board first.

This is the most ridiculous thing I have heard! Use the money to lower class sizes, get more technology in the classroom, offer stipends for teachers to teach after school and on the weekend, but don't use the money to pay students for something that they should have passed before. Why get students in the habit of receiving handouts? Why not just point them toward the welfare line instead of toward earning a degree?

The other day the Sun published an article about the poor quality of food being served in the City schools. The students said that they were receiving moldy food or items that were not even thawed and ready to eat. It seems to me that the City might want to spend the money to improve the basic needs of the students. Better food, equipment and materials would go a long way to make a student more productive and maybe happier to be at school. I can't imagine being excited to learn when I'm seved moldy bread in the cafeteria. It's a disgrace.

These types of incentives are always unfair to the students who do well already. They've worked hard in the past, so now they're being "rewarded" by getting a job tutoring other students, which takes their time away from their studying, part-time jobs, etc. So, not only are they not eligible for the most valuable incentives, but they're actually penalized for their prior hard work.

This is only going to make them find a way to cheat.

I think that this is where we find out what Dr. Alonso is made of and if he can really do all that his potential speaks of.

One of the posters says that this smacks of (or smells of) desperation. Isn't that where these 5000 kids are? Isn't that where this city is? When do we stop pretending that things are fine and start admitting that we have failed these and so many other kids.

Will this plan get all 5000 to pass? No, and I don't believe anyone thinks it will. But what if it gets 100 of them to pass who might not have before? First off that means that only 100 of them will get paid. It also means that there are 100 fewer high school dropouts in Baltimore, 100 more students who have a piece of paper that allows them access to a new world (college, jobs and the like) 100 fewer citizens who are that much more likely to need even more assistance. Let's say that it works for half of the students - again, that means that only 2500 students get paid, but that those lives are forever changed, just as their lives have been forever changed by the fact that they were born in a city that has an educational system that has failed them and an assessment system that, created by adults on a set of standards that has little or no relevance to what it takes to become a productive member of society and so on. Let's say that this works for no one, than nothing was lost - no money gets spent and we are still looking at 5000 people who will not get high school diplomas. And imagine if it works for all 5000 kids. Hmmmmm. Where's the down side? A one year experiment that if it fails we have lost nothing.

This in some ways is similar to providing compensation to special education students (this now dates me as someone who has been around a while) for the failures of BCPSS in years past, but instead of saying here's your VCR for just being screwed over by a failing system, this says that there is a reward for rising above that failing system and succeeding anyway.

Do I love the idea? In an ideal world no, no more than I love thinking that there should be an incentive for anything, but this isn't an ideal world. I think that teachers who rise above should be rewarded, I think that students who rise above should also be rewarded. :Let's remember that no student, no individual teacher or family choose to attend elementary, middle and or high schools that for what ever reasons didn't prepare them for what they are now expected to do. No 8 year old chose to miss school or attend a class where resources were in short supply or the teaching and curriculum didn't meet their needs. I am not excusing anyone including students who aren't now taking advantage of more positive opportunities, but I am not willing to say that this massive failure is 100% on students shoulders and that the system shouldn't try anything, yes, anything (there, I said it) to try and assist these kids now.

As for spending the money elsewhere say, to reduce class size - this isn't enough money to make a dent in that. And research says that smaller class sizes do not have that great an impact on achievement anyway. And for those about to blow a gasket, yes, I know, research says whatever you want it to say.

Paying to pass the HSAs is a bad idea on so many levels. My child is a Junior in high school who took the extra classes to prepare for the HSAs and studied the guides for the test, and passed them. Her reward is that she will get her diploma next year. The kids who failed are already getting a break if they keep failing the HSAs-they get to make it up by doing a "senior project". As parents, my husband and I ensure our kids study hard in school and get good grades. This whole thing disgusts me.

It's not a bad idea, but I think it's putting the cart before the horse.

Let's start with the original 5000. OK, it's worth a shot as a bold incentive or perhaps a pilot program. So let's try it out.

What I see as the bigger, related problem that BCPSS has is keeping the kids in school in the first place so that they can sit for the test. Remember that once children turn 16, we can no longer compel them to come to school. So perhaps attendance should be the first incentive. Put it on a sliding scale, with the lowest acceptable attendance rate being 94% (state standard). And this way, even the achievers are rewarded.

Now, we move on to the HSAs and again (in an inversion of steegness' suggestion), base the incentives on a sliding scale. Pass the test and get one amount. Blow the test away and get more. Fail the test and get a hearty handshake. Incentives for passing would be a one-time thing, so it's not like you can take the test enough times that you have to declare it on your 1040 form. Plus, if you fail you get nothing but if you take again and pass, you'd get the incentive. This way there isn't a reason to fail the first time.

Teacher643 - thank you! Simply thank you for being so eloquent and for being so lucid in your description of the issues involved. Well done.

Other examples: http://www.ajc.com/search/content/metro/stories/2008/01/23/studentpay0123.html

Couldn't help but come back to post this thought.

Regardless of one's stance on the issue - isn't it exciting that schools are becoming a focus of conversation? The wind of change is in the air and people are really starting to catch a drift. We can finally attack the apathy by investing the community. Sure people may think this is a terrible reform initiative, but at least they're considering it... at least they're thinking about schools... at least these kids in our system are getting some attention as to what's best for them. 25 posts on an ed blog story - impressive! I'm looking forward to the continued progress.

I whole-heartedly agree with Claude. How about rewarding kids for attendance? I bet many of those 5,000 have missed a large amount of school days. Students missing 10-20 days a year is about average.

And I don't care what research says, teaching 45 kids in a cramped, under-resourced classroom is a lot more difficult than teaching 25. That's just logic.

I agree with Bill's comment whole-heartedly. I think it's a great thing that the community is at least interested. I also think it's a great thing that the Board is split on the idea - Alonso is challenging them to think outside the box and it's making them ask questions. They have passed plenty of terrible ideas as a single unit on auto-pilot over the years because they see evidence of initiatives being successful in other school districts. Baltimore is a different beast and it needs a unique strategy.

I still have some questions, but at least Alonso is challenging the way we do things.

Bill:

I whole heartedly agree that there is finally some excitement about education and am looking forard to what this conversation brings.

As for the "split" on the board about this - what a huge load of horse hockey! The board voted on this plan this past Tuesday night! Are they saying they didn't know what they were voting on? Or are they now saying that since there seems to be some controversey they are now having second thoughts? Please, don't give me that, "I didn't read what I was voting on" line. I am disgusted that these folks would begin to show their true colors on "out of the box" school reform once a little public pressure comes down. Not everything that Dr. Alonso is getting ready to do is going to be popular - heck, change never is. Having said that, it's time for the board to back him up publically especially after taking a vote on something. What a joke!

I too like the idea of taking a look at some other factors and seeing if there might be a way to reward students here, but this is a one time deal with funds that we are being given back from the previous administrations mismanagement of Title 1 dollars.

Teacher643: For the record, the board didn't vote on this plan. Dr. Alonso had to get it approved by Nancy Grasmick, who has oversight of the money. Once she signed off, it's his to spend regardless of what board members think. There was a presentation on the initiative at the board meeting Tuesday, but no vote.

The Board, when they hired the CEO gave him total authority on policy and partice. They have become window dressing for the public.

I have a better idea.. lets pay the smart students the money to take the test for the failing students. This will kill two birds with one stone. The failing students will no longer to a burden to the educational system and the smart ones will have a small nest egg for college....

Sara: Thanks for the clarification. What was their reaction Tuesday night?

Teacher643: The board conversation on Tuesday night was focused on the other elements of the $6.3 million plan, not the student financial incentives. Jim Campbell was the only one who asked directly what the incentives meant, but the answer provided by Roger Shaw was vague enough that many people in the audience clearly didn't understand what they were talking about. The power point presentation that was made available to the public did not define what "student incentives" meant. A more detailed proposal had been provided to board members, but they would have had to read it closely to get the point that the system was going to pay kids for improvement. I don't know if Dr. Alonso spelled it out to them in executive session or not. I couldn't figure out if some of them didn't realize that the plan was to pay kids for improvement, or if they weren't discussing it in the hopes that the press wouldn't pick up on it. Brian Morris, who clearly was in the loop, alluded to the controversy at the end of the meeting when he said that "there will be those who will decide to throw stones at the efforts being presented tonight," but the goal is for students to be successful.

The commentary on this topic could go on and on forever. The bottom line is that if Alonzo wants it, it will happen. I don't know if it will work or not. Quite frankly, while $100 is a bit of money, most of the students I have spoken with were underwhelmed. I would like for all the students to be self-motivated but they aren't. Yes, BCPSS has let them down but what lesson are we teaching here? I am not sure anyone knows but, if it played elsewhere, BCPSS will try anything once. I just hope that the crumbling buildings, overcrowded classrooms, and overworked staff will have the same money thrown at them sometime in the near future.

Sara -

Isn't it interesting that Dr. Grasmick is concerned that there may not be any scientific research to support a "pay to pass" program. My question to her is - where is the scientific research that a high stakes exit exam program will translate into higher achievement on independent measures, like the SAT, ACT, etc.? The answer is that the only thing we know from research is that high stakes exit exams will increase the drop out rate, and will probably cause scores on independent tests to decrease, due to the laser focus on narrow state tests. Also - nobody is asking about is asking whether the scores students receive are valid. We are entrusting the test development and scoring to private, unregulated testing companies which are operating in an industry which is bursting at the seams with an unprecedented demand. We regulate the companies that make our dog food - but we don't regulate the companies who develop and score the tests which determine who graduates! To read more about testing company foul-ups - go to http://www.geocities.com/stophsa/ScoringErrors.html . And finally - why are no reporters asking about what has become of the testimony from the recent regional public hearings on the HSA program? Has a report been submitted to the state legislature as required? If so - we should be talking about testimony that charged that students with special needs were denied reasonable multiple-day accommodations on last spring's administration of the HSA's - causing them to fail. Who is to be held accountable for this? And how will parents ever discover whether their students were victims of a scoring foul-up - when we aren't allowed within 10 feet of the test without jumping through many hoops and signing a non-disclosure agreement?