Skip to main content
Appendix F: Description of Coding for Overtime and Technology Conditions

The districts were rated on overtime and technology conditions by three members of the research team using a three point scale. The raters were the team members who had the greatest familiarity with the full range of data: survey results, interviews, focus groups, and central database extracts. Each rater examined the data on overtime and technology from the district’s official statement plus comments by survey respondents and interviewees. They then rated each district using 1=low favorability, 2=moderate favorability, and 3= high favorability.

The criteria for overtime rating were clearest for the high or low rating, with 3 for districts that allowed overtime compensation for at least some extra work, and 1 for districts that prohibited overtime work or clearly refused compensation. Districts that were unclear or had a mixture of reports with respect to these criteria were rated 2.

The criteria for technology conditions were similar. A high rating of 3 was given to districts with wireless connectivity and laptops for all testers. A low rating of 1 was assigned to districts that did not provide wireless connectivity or that did not provide exclusive use of laptops for testers. The 2 rating was given to the districts with a mixture of or uncertain technology arrangements.

The three testers rated the districts independently and then discussed the results to resolve differences.