Upload
nau
View
30
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Teacher and Principal Effectiveness: What Do We Know?. Philanthropy Roundtable Atlanta, GA September, 2009. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Teacher and Principal Effectiveness:What Do We Know?
Philanthropy Roundtable Atlanta, GA September, 2009
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2008 THE EDUCATION TRUST
1. There are much bigger differences among our teachers than
we ever knew. And those differences matter hugely to
students.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUSTSource: Gordon, R., Kane, T.J., and Staiger, D.O. (2006). Identifying Effective teachers Using Performance on the Job. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
10 Point Average Difference Between Top and Bottom Teachers
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Comparing the Average Student in the Classrooms of Bottom Quartile and Top
Quartile Teachers
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
Pe
rce
nti
le P
oin
ts G
ain
ed
/Lo
ss
Bottom QuartileTop Quartile
Gordon, R., Kane, T.J., and Staiger, D.O. (2006). Identifying Effective teachers Using Performance on the Job. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
10
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Students in Dallas Gain More in Math with Effective Teachers: One Year Growth From 3rd-4th Grade
Source: Heather Jordan, Robert Mendro, and Dash Weerasinghe, The Effects of Teachers on Longitudinal Student Achievement, 1997.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
LOW ACHIEVING STUDENTS IN TN GAIN MORE WITH EFFECTIVE TEACHERS: One
Year Growth
14
53
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
low high
Sanders and Rivers, Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Academic Achievement, 1998.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
2. Impact of effective teachers swamps almost every other “intervention,” including
class size reduction.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Cumulative Teacher Effects On Students’ Math Scores in Dallas (Grades 3-5)
Source: Heather Jordan, Robert Mendro, and Dash Weerasinghe, The Effects of Teachers on Longitudinal Student Achievement, 1997.
Beginning Grade 3Percentile Rank= 55
Beginning Grade 3Percentile Rank= 57
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
3. Though there are large differences among our teachers we
pretend that there aren’t.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
The Widget Effect
“When it comes to measuring instructional performance, current policies and systems overlook significant differences between teachers. There is little or no differentiation of excellent teaching from good, good from fair, or fair from poor. This is the Widget Effect: a tendency to treat all teachers as roughly interchangeable, even when their teaching is quite variable. Consequently, teachers are not developed as professionals with individual strengths and capabilities, and poor performance is rarely identified or addressed.”
• The New Teacher Project, 2009
Source:
Source:
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
4. Good teachers are not fairly distributed.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
More Classes in High-Poverty Secondary Schools Taught by Out-of-Field* Teachers
High- Poverty
Low-poverty
Note: High Poverty school-75% or more of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch. Low-poverty school -15% or fewer of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch.
National
*Teachers with neither certification nor major. Data for secondary-level core academic classes (Math, Science, Social Studies, English) across USA.Source: Analysis of 2003-2004 Schools and Staffing Survey data by Richard Ingersoll, University of Pennsylvania 2007.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Math Classes at High-Poverty and High- Minority Schools More Likely to be Taught by Out of Field* Teachers
Note: High Poverty school-75% or more of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch. Low-poverty school -15% or fewer of the students are eligible for free/reduced price lunch. High minority school-75% or more of the students are Black, Hispanic, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander. Low-minority school -10% or fewer of the students are non-White students.
*Teachers with neither certification nor major. Data for secondary-level core academic classes (Math, Science, Social Studies, English) across USA.Source: Analysis of 2003-2004 Schools and Staffing Survey data by Richard Ingersoll, University of Pennsylvania 2007.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Students at High-Minority Schools More Likely to Be Taught By Novice* Teachers
*Novice teachers are those with three years or fewer experience.Source: Analysis of 2003-2004 Schools and Staffing Survey data by Richard Ingersoll, University of Pennsylvania 2007.
Note: High minority school-75% or more of the students are Black, Hispanic, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander. Low-minority school -10% or fewer of the students are non-White students.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST1998 by The Education Trust, Inc.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Tennessee: High poverty/high minority schools have fewer of the “most effective” teachers and more “least effective”
teachers
Source: Tennessee Department of Education 2007. “Tennessee’s Most Effective Teachers: Are they assigned to the schools that need them most?” http://tennessee.gov/education/nclb/doc/TeacherEffectiveness2007_03.pdf
Note: High Poverty/High minority means at least 75% qualify for FRPL and at least 75% are minority.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Low-Achieving Students are More Likely to be Assigned to Ineffective Teachers than Effective Teachers
Source: Sitha Babu and Robert Mendro, Teacher Accountability: HLM-Based Teacher Effectiveness Indices in the Investigation of Teacher Effects on Student Achievement in a State Assessment Program, AERA Annual Meeting, 2003.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
4. We don’t know nearly enough about the characteristics of effective teachers…and even less about their
practices.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
In last few years, volume of studies has grown rather dramatically. And we are
beginning to learn some of the basics.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
What are we learning?• What Seems to
Matter• Experience, but only
for first year or two;• Content knowledge,
at least in math and science;
• Teachers’ own test performance.
• What Doesn’t Seem to Matter
• Traditional vs. Alternate Certification;
• Masters Degrees;• Experience beyond
the first several years.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
But there is still a lot more digging to do, if only to
understand what seem to be exceptions…
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
For example, while novices usually aren’t as good as teachers with at
least 3 years experience….
• Studies in Louisiana show that some programs produce teachers who are more effective in year one, than veteran teachers in same district;
• Recent study in North Carolina found Teach For America Corps Members who taught in secondary schools as effective as veteran teachers in those same schools.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
And within any “type” of teacher, there is a wide range of
effectiveness.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUSTSource: Gordon, R., Kane, T.J., and Staiger, D.O. (2006). Identifying Effective teachers Using Performance on the Job. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
Similar Effectiveness, Regardless of Certification
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Some nuances…
• Traditional a little better with younger children, especially in reading;
• Alternates a little better with older children, especially in math;
• Most differences in lower grades wash out by year 3.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Effectiveness More Important than Certification
“The difference between the 75th percentileteacher and the 50th percentile teacher for all
three groups of teachers was roughly five times as large as the difference between the average certified teacher and the average uncertified teacher.”
Three groups = traditionally certified, alternatively certified, and uncertified
Gordon, R., Kane, T.J., and Staiger, D.O. (2006). Identifying Effective teachers Using Performance on the Job. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Bottom line: Most proxies for teacher effectiveness—especially
things like Masters Degrees or average years of experience-- don’t turn out to mean very
much.• That’s why incorporating and using
value-added measures is so important.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2008 THE EDUCATION TRUST
5. Principals are critical—at least in part because they are the ones who
attract and hold good teachers.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
But if you think we know shockingly little about good
teachers…
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
You will be thoroughly despondent about how little we know about effective principals,
other than that they are RELENTLESS and GOOD TEAM
BUILDERS, and that ed leadership programs DON’T PRODUCE VERY
GOOD ONES.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
6. The bottom line, though, is very clear: if we are going to improve
achievement and close gaps, we’ve got to act on what we know, while
also digging deeper for insights and answers.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
And we’ve got to provide generous support for the break-the-mold
teacher and principal selection and preparation programs.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Why?
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
A few years ago, we got a wake up call when the 2000 PISA results were
published.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Rankings are for the 26 OECD countries participating in PISA in 2000, 2003, and 2006.
PISA PerformanceU.S.A. Ranks Near Bottom, Has Fallen Since 2000
Subject 2000 Rank(out of 26)
Mathematics 17th
Science 13th
Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2006 Results , http://www.oecd.org/
2003 Rank(out of 26)
22nd
Tied for 17th
2006 Rank(out of 26)
22nd
19th
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
PISA 2003 Math Of 29 OECD Countries, U.S.A. Ranked 24th
Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results , http://www.oecd.org/
U.S.A.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
PISA 2006 Science Of 30 OECD Countries, U.S.A. Ranked 21st
U.S.A.
Source: NCES, PISA 2006 Results, http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/
Higher than U.S. average Not measurably different from U.S. average Lower than U.S. average
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
PISA 2003 Problem-SolvingU.S. Ranks 24th Out of 29 OECD Countries
Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results , http://www.oecd.org/
U.S.A.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Only place we rank high?
Inequality.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
*Of 29 OECD countries, based on scores of students at the 5th and 95th percentiles.
PISA 2003: Gaps in Performance Of U.S.15 Year-Olds Are Among the Largest of OECD
Countries
Rank in Performance Gaps Between Highest and Lowest Achieving
Students *
Mathematical Literacy 8th
Problem Solving 6th
Source: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA 2003 Results, data available at http://www.oecd.org/
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Among OECD Countries, U.S.A. has the 4th Largest Gap Between High-SES and Low-SES Students
PISA 2006 Science
Source: OECD, PISA 2006 Results, table 4.8b, http://www.oecd.org/
U.S.A.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Fortunately, we are making some progress—especially at the
elementary and middle school levels.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
4th Grade Reading:Record Performance with Gap Narrowing
• NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress, NCES
*Denotes previous assessment format
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
4th Grade Math:Record Performance with Gap Narrowing
• NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress, NCES
*Denotes previous assessment format
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
8th Grade Reading: Recent Gap Narrowing for Blacks, Less for Latinos
• NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress, NCES
*Denotes previous assessment format
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
8th Grade Math: Progress for All Groups, Some Gap Narrowing
• NAEP 2008 Trends in Academic Progress, NCES
*Denotes previous assessment format
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
And much of that progress is being led by urban school
districts, including the one right here in Atlanta.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Note: Data refer to the percentage point increase in the percent of students at Basic and Above between 2003 and 2007.
NAEP Grade 4 Reading – African American
Districts Outperforming Their States in Movement into Basic (2003-2007)
• NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
District District Movement State Movement
Atlanta 9 6
Los Angeles 7 5
San Diego 6 5
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
Note: Data refer to the percentage point increase in the percent of students at Basic and Above between 2003 and 2007.
NAEP Grade 4 Math – African American Districts Outperforming Their States in Movement into Basic (2003-2007)
• NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
District District Movement State Movement
Boston 16 13
New York City 14 11
San Diego 11 7
Atlanta 10 8
Houston 7 5
Charlotte 2 0
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
NAEP Grade 8 Reading – African American Districts Outperforming Their States in Movement into Basic (2003-2007)
• NAEP Data Explorer, NCES
District District Movement State MovementHouston 9 5
Boston 7 3
Atlanta 6 2
Cleveland 6 -3
San Diego 2 -1
Charlotte 1 -3
Note: Data refer to the percentage point increase in the percent of students at Basic and Above between 2003 and 2007.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
We can’t go the distance, though, without strong teachers.
© 2009 THE EDUCATION TRUST
“Massive Impact”
“If the effects were to accumulate, having atop-quartile teacher rather than a bottom
quartile teacher four years in a row would be:
– enough to close the black-white test score gap…; and,
– Have twice the impact of reducing class size from 22 to 16.”
Source: Gordon, R., Kane, T.J., and Staiger, D.O. (2006). Identifying Effective teachers Using Performance on the Job. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
For more information, visit www.edtrust.org
1250 H Street N.W. Suite 700Washington, D.C. 20005202/293-1217
November 12-14, 2009, in Arlington, Va.
Send a team to our 2009 ConferenceWHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH: Smart Choices and Bold Action
to Raise Achievement and Close Gaps