Policy Brief: Teaching Quality

Overview
Policies
Assessing Efforts at Improvement
Useful Resources

Overview

No one disputes that quality teaching is a critical component of student success—teachers’ knowledge, skill, and dedication affect their students’ achievement dramatically. Unfortunately, quality teaching is unevenly distributed, with high-minority and high-poverty schools being staffed by less educated, less experienced teachers. In order to give every student an equal opportunity to learn, we must direct resources toward policies that can increase quality teaching across the board, including improving teacher preparation and professional development, restructuring teacher compensation, and paying special attention to hard-to-staff schools.

Quality Teaching and Student Achievement

Numerous studies demonstrate the strong link between quality teaching and academic achievement.

A 2000 report by Linda Darling-Hammond of Stanford University found that “measures of teacher preparation and certification are by far the strongest correlates of student achievement in reading and mathematics, both before and after controlling for student poverty and language status.”

In 1998, researchers for the National Bureau of Economic Research reported that teacher effectiveness is the most influential variable affecting student achievement.

In 1996, William Sanders and Joan Rivers of the University of Tennessee found that test scores of two similar groups of second-graders were separated by as many as 50 percentile points by the time the students reached fifth grade, solely because of differences in teacher effectiveness. The researchers also found that as teacher effectiveness increases, lower-achieving students are the first to benefit.

Understanding Quality Teaching

While researchers concur that quality teaching is key to student success, agreeing on what makes for effective instruction is more difficult. However, researchers have identified several factors that likely contribute to quality teaching.

Subject matter knowledge – Teachers must have at least basic competence in the material they are teaching, especially in secondary schools, where subject-specific curricula are more demanding. According to How Teaching Matters, a 2000 Educational Testing Service report, students whose math and science teachers had relevant college majors performed 39% above grade level on average.

Knowledge of teaching and learning – Although the need for solid content knowledge is obvious, teachers’ classroom skills and understanding of the learning process are even more clearly linked to student success. In a 2000 research review, Darling-Hammond cites several studies confirming that teachers’ education coursework and professional development correlate strongly with their effectiveness.

Teaching experience – Darling-Hammond also reports that teachers with less than three years of experience are less effective than more senior teachers, although the benefits of experience do seem to level off after about five years.

Disparities in Quality Teaching

Many schools in high-poverty inner-city or rural areas have trouble recruiting and retaining highly qualified teachers. Researchers have concluded that disparities in teacher quality among schools of varying student populations are severe enough to create and maintain massive achievement gaps.

According to the National Council for Education Statistics 2003 Condition of Education Report, schools with high percentages of minority, low-income, and limited-English-proficient students are more likely to employ beginning teachers.

A 2002 report by the Education Trust found that while out-of-field teaching is a widespread problem, students in high-poverty schools are 77% more likely to be assigned an out-of-field teacher than students in more affluent schools. Classes in high-minority schools are 40% more likely to be assigned an out-of-field teacher.

NCES’s 2002 Condition of Education Report showed that teachers with master’s degrees were less likely to teach in high-poverty, high-minority schools.

Reasons for this problem may include:

Economic factors – Schools located in economically depressed areas are forced to offer relatively low salaries and benefits.

Geographic undesirability – Teachers may be reluctant to live in isolated rural areas with few amenities.

Perceived challenge – Teachers may believe jobs in low-performing, under-resourced schools will be too challenging, frustrating, or unsatisfying.

Teacher attrition – The same conditions that deter teachers from jobs in high-poverty, high-minority schools also increase rates of teacher turnover. The National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future reported in 2003 that the turnover rate for teachers in high-poverty schools is nearly one-third higher than the overall rate.

Policies

There are three main strategies to ensure that all students, including those in high-poverty and high-minority schools, have access to quality teaching. First, worthwhile teacher-preparation programs must prepare teachers to enter the classroom. Second, all teachers must have access to ongoing, effective professional development. Finally, the education community must consider the special needs of hard-to-staff schools, and come up with creative ways to recruit and retain high-quality teachers for these schools.

Teacher Preparation

In 2001, researchers from Michigan State University completed a report for the U.S. Department of Education summarizing the current research on teacher preparation. The study’s authors conclude that while “overall, the research base concerning teacher preparation is relatively thin,” studies do show a positive connection between effective teacher preparation and performance in the classroom.

Teachers agree that field experience is critical to success in the classroom, and most believe teacher preparation programs don’t provide enough of it. In a 2000 survey by Public Agenda, 56% of teachers polled said their training put too much emphasis on the theory and philosophy of education, and not enough on dealing with the practical challenges of teaching. Only 30% of respondents said their training involved enough experience in actual classrooms.

Another important concern is the amount of in-depth subject-matter knowledge teachers acquire during their training. A 2000 report by the Educational Testing Service found that prospective teachers in universities with large percentages of education majors and minors score lower on the Praxis II licensure examination than prospective teachers in schools that put less emphasis on pedagogical training. According to the authors, this finding indicates that some education schools may “place too great an emphasis on knowledge of pedagogy, potentially at the expense of knowledge of the subject matter to be taught.”

States and teacher education programs have responded to these problems in a variety of ways:

In 1999, Colorado passed legislation that withdrew state approval for existing teacher preparation programs and required the programs to reapply under new performance-based standards. These standards strengthen requirements for subject-matter knowledge, field experience, and the ability to teach to state standards and assessments. The measure also created “teacher-in-residence” programs that provide on-the-job training for college graduates without backgrounds in education.

In 1998, the Georgia Board of Regents adopted a program of 10 Principles and Actions for the Preparation of Educators for the Schools. The principles hold teacher preparation programs accountable for their graduates’ performance on state licensure exams. They also require the state university system to “guarantee” the quality of any teacher it prepares by agreeing to provide remedial instruction to ineffective recent graduates. Alabama has a similar law.

Connecticut’s rigorous two-year teacher induction program, Beginning Educator Support and Training, assigns trained mentors to beginning teachers and offers seminars and workshops designed to hone their skills. At the end of the two years, teachers must submit an extensive portfolio project and earn a passing grade to be certified. California Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment program also includes one-on-one mentoring for new teachers.

In recent years, hundreds of colleges of education have created five-year degree programs that allow more in-depth subject matter study and more clinical training in schools. Several studies have shown that because graduates of five-year programs have higher retention rates than traditional graduates, extended programs actually reduce the overall cost of preparing career teachers.

Many states have taken steps to link preschool, K-12, and postsecondary education in a cohesive way. These efforts, often called P-16 initiatives, promise to improve teacher preparation by providing practice teaching sites and familiarizing prospective teachers with state learning standards. The programs also aim to improve student achievement and increase access to college by clarifying what students must know to move onto the next level and by ensuring that curricula and assessments point toward this goal.

Professional Development

Even well-prepared teachers need continuous training to stay effective. Professional development can expose instructors to new teaching methods and pedagogical research, help them stay on top of state performance standards, and teach them to incorporate technology into the curriculum. Unfortunately, traditional methods of professional development—typically one-day workshops on isolated topics—have proven unhelpful for most teachers. Current research on high-quality professional development suggests that a more integrated approach is necessary to improve teaching quality.

The National Staff Development Council has developed a set of guidelines for evaluating professional development programs. According to an article published by the NSDC, some of the groups recommendations include:

Setting clear and high standards for the learning of all students and then focusing on the changes in practice required to achieve these goals.

Investing in teacher learning, ideally allocating at least 10 percent of schools’ budgets to staff development.

Involving all teachers in the continuous, intellectually rigorous study of the content they teach and the ways they teach it.

Embedding opportunities for professional learning and collaborating with colleagues in the daily schedule of teachers. NSDC advocates that at least 25 percent of teachers' time be devoted to their own learning. Schools should schedule more time for collaborating with colleagues.

Providing teachers with classroom assessment and other action research skills that allow them to determine on a regular basis if student learning has been improved because of their new knowledge and skills.

Recruitment and Retention in Hard-to-Staff Schools

As noted above, high-poverty and high-minority schools tend to lack the resources necessary to recruit and retain highly qualified teachers. However, researchers have suggested several possible approaches to the problem of hard-to-staff schools.

Programs to recruit nontraditional teaching candidates—such as mid-career professionals, retired military personal, and high-achieving college students—have been able to augment traditional sources of new hires. One program that has experienced documented success is the DeWitt Wallace-Reader’s Digest Fund’s Pathways to Teaching Careers Program. From 1989 to 2000, the Pathways program recruited paraprofessionals, uncertified teachers, and returned Peace Corps volunteers to teach at high-need schools across the country. The program provided recruits with a rigorous teacher preparation curriculum tailored to their needs and supported them while they pursue degrees and teaching certificates. A 2001 evaluation of the program by the Urban Institute concluded that the program exceeded its recruitment goals and that Pathways graduates were perceived by their principals as more effective than the typical beginning teacher in their schools. Moreover, Pathways graduates were more likely to remain in teaching for at least three years than typical beginning teachers, and they taught in high-need districts at extremely high rates. Pathways is now a nationally recognized model for creating alternative routes into the teaching profession.

In a June 2002 paper , Cynthia D. Prince, the issues analysis director of the American Association of School Administrators, suggests that because most teachers “will not choose to work in the most difficult schools voluntarily,” states and districts should use comprehensive systems of financial incentives to attract qualified teachers to high-need schools. Such incentives could include targeted salary increases for hard-to-fill positions, bonuses, housing incentives, tuition assistance, and tax credits. Both New York and California have recently implemented recruitment programs that incorporate several of these elements.

The New Teacher Project’s 2003 article “Missed Opportunities: How We Keep High-Quality Teachers Out of Urban Classrooms” argues that the reason high-quality teachers don’t end up in high-need schools isn’t a lack of applicants, but the delayed hiring process used by many large urban districts. Because prospective teachers are often left in limbo until July or August, many withdraw their applications out of frustration. Among other recommendations, the authors urge policymakers to adopt predictable budgets early in the year to insulate hard-to-staff schools from budget fluctuations.

Assessing Efforts at Improvement

State Efforts

State-by-state trends in standardized math and reading test scores support the link between teaching quality and student achievement. The states that lead the nation on these exams have long prioritized teacher quality.

Darling-Hammond points out that “long-time leaders” in student achievement, like Minnesota, North Dakota, and Iowa, “have all had a long history of professional teacher policy and are among the 12 states that have state professional standards boards which have enacted high standards for persons entering the teaching profession.” She adds: “They are recently joined at the top of the achievement distribution by Wisconsin, Maine, and Montana, states that have also enacted rigorous standards for teaching and that are among the few which rarely hire unqualified teachers on substandard licenses.”

In addition, research indicates that focusing on teaching quality can improve achievement in struggling states.

In a 2001 Center for the Study of Teaching and Learning report, Darling-Hammond and Suzanne Wilson of Michigan State University evaluated Connecticut’s large-scale efforts to improve teaching quality in the mid-1980s. These efforts included raising and equalizing teacher salaries across districts, increasing licensing standards by requiring more preparation to enter the field, creating scholarships and forgivable loans to draw excellent students into teacher education programs, eliminating emergency licensing, requiring teacher-to-teacher mentorship and ongoing professional development, and more. Researchers believe these policies are a major factor behind the sharp and steady increase in Connecticut students’ scores on standardized tests.

Costing-Out Studies

Education finance experts recognize the importance of improving teaching quality and have included this goal in costing-out studies in various states.

“An Evidence-Based Approach to School Finance Adequacy in Arkansas,” recommended substantial changes aimed at improving teaching quality.

The report advised using a performance-based pay system and increasing teacher salaries overall to increase competitiveness with surrounding areas and attract teachers in high-need subject areas.
The report also recommended more funding for professional development, and outlined criteria for effective professional development programs.

The “New York Adequacy Study” recommended using professional development to ensure teachers’ understanding of state standards and to help them reach diverse and at-risk student populations. The report emphasized that professional development should go beyond workshops and encourage mentoring and school-based peer exchanges.

Useful Resources

The Southeast Center for Teaching Quality is a research and training organization that seeks to guide policy and impact teachers. Executive Director Barnett Berry has presented extensively on "Recruiting and Retaining Good Teachers for Hard-to-Staff, Low-Performing Schools."

The Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession works to strengthen the teaching profession by researching quality-teaching issues, holding workshops for teachers interested in education advocacy, and more.

The University of Washington’s Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy researches ways to improve the quality of teaching and learning in public schools.

The Education Commission of the States maintains a comprehensive issue site on teaching quality with information about current policies and links to recent research.

The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education is a coalition of professional organizations that accredits teacher preparation programs.

The National Council on Teacher Quality promotes policies to improve teacher quality and to direct the best teachers to the neediest schools. The group monitors federal, state, and local teacher policies and publishes research reports on key issues.

The National Council on Teaching and America’s Future published the influential report “What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future” () in 1996. The organization continues to research and advocate for strategies to improve teaching quality.

The National Staff Development Council is a professional association focusing on staff development and school improvement.

Prepared by Emily Wallace, January 21, 2005