ChamberlinR.WraggT.HaynesG., & WraggC. (2002). Performance-related pay and the teaching profession: A review of the literature. Research Papers in Education, 17, 31–49.
2.
FryerR.G. (2011). Teacher incentives and student achievement: Evidence from New York City Public Schools.Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. www.nber.org/papers/w16850.
3.
GlazermanS. & SeifullahA. (2010). An evaluation of the Teacher Advancement Program in Chicago: Year Two impact report.Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
4.
GoodmanS. & TurnerL. (2011, Spring). Does whole-school performance pay improve student learning? Evidence from the New York City schools. Education Next, 11 (2), 66–71.
5.
HenemanH.G.III & MilanowskiA.T. (1999). Teachers' attitudes about teacher bonuses under school-based performance award programs. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12, 327–341.
6.
KelleyC.J. & FinniganK. (2003). The effects of organizational context on teacher expectancy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 603–634.
7.
KelleyC.OddenA.MilanowskiA., & HenemanH.III (2000). The motivational effects of school-based performance (CPRE Policy Brief, RB-29).Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
8.
MarshJ.A.SpringerM.G.McCaffreyD.F.YuanK.EpsteinS.KoppichJ.KalraN.DiMartinoC., & PengA. (2011). A big apple for educators: New York City's experiment with schoolwide performance bonuses.Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
9.
SpringerM.G.LewisJ.L.PodgurskyM.J.EhlertM.W.GronbergT.J.HamiltonL.S.JansenD.W.StecherB.M.TaylorL.L.LopezO.S., & PengA. (2009). Texas Educator Excellence Grant (TEEG) Program: Year Three evaluation report.Nashville, TN: National Center on Performance Incentives.
10.
SpringerM.G.HamiltonL.S.McCaffreyD.F.BallouD.LeV.PepperM.LockwoodJ.R., & StecherB.M. (2010). Teacher pay for performance: Experimental evidence from the Project on Incentives in Teaching.Nashville, TN: National Center on Performance Incentives.
11.
VroomV.H. (1964). Work and motivation.New York, NY: Wiley.