Teachers

As the debate over education reforms like the Common Core rage across the country, policy makers, advocates, pundits, and wonks clamor to have their views heard. In the din, the voices of teachers—upon whose shoulders the success of education reform ultimately lies—are sometimes drowned out. The third iteration of Scholastic’s Primary Sources survey (the first two were released in 2009 and 2011) provides powerful insight into teachers’ attitudes towards their profession, Common Core implementation, and teacher evaluations. Of the 20,000 teachers who participated, most showed enthusiasm for the new Common Core standards. Indeed, 57 percent of teachers in Common Core states believe that the standards will have a positive impact on students, outweighing those who believe the opposite by an impressive seven-to-one ratio; 35 percent say they will not make much of a difference. (It’s interesting to note that this view contradicts the impression given by the National Education Association last week.) However, teachers do remain cautious: 73 percent reported that implementing the standards will be challenging, and the same proportion noted that it will force them to make changes to their current teaching practices. It is therefore unsurprising that almost all respondents asked for additional time to find curricular materials and quality CCSS-based professional development (this syncs with our new study). Perhaps the most interesting takeaway from this study is that fewer than 10 percent of teachers believe their voices are heard at the national and state level. Yet 98 percent see teaching...

Categories: 

Dara and the Following

Dara’s taste in TV shows is questionable, but her ed-policy knowledge is not. She and Michelle dish on Common Core implementation, student-data privacy, and marketing in schools. Amber gets pensive about pensions.

Amber's Research Minute

Missouri Charter Schools and Teacher Pension Plans: How Well Do Existing Pension Plans Serve Charter and Urban Teachers? by Cory Koedel, Shawn Ni, Michael Podgursky, and P. Brett Xiang, (Kansas City, MO: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, February 2014).

by Katie Cristol and Brinton S. Ramsey

Foreword by Amber M. Northern and Michael J. Petrilli

The Common Core State Standards are in place in forty-five states—and in many of those jurisdictions, educators are hard at work trying to bring them to life in their schools and classrooms.

But how is implementation going so far? That’s what this new study explores in four “early-implementer” school systems. Common Core in the Districts: An Early Look at Early Implementers provides an in-depth examination of real educators as they earnestly attempt to put higher standards into practice. This up-close look at district-level, school-level, and classroom-level implementation yields several key findings:

  1. Teachers and principals are the primary faces and voices of the Common Core standards in their communities
  2. Implementation works best when district and school leaders lock onto the Common Core standards as the linchpin of instruction, professional learning, and accountability in their buildings
  3. In the absence of externally vetted, high-quality Common Core materials, districts are striving—with mixed success—to devise their own
  4. The scramble to deliver quality CCSS-aligned professional development to all who need it is as crucial and (so far) as patchy as the quest for suitable curriculum materials
  5. The lack of aligned assessments will make effective implementation of the Common Core challenging for another year

In short, districts are in the near-impossible situation of operationalizing new standards before high-quality curriculum and tests aligned to them are finished. Yet the clock is ticking, and the new tests and truly...

Expanding Access to Great Teachers

Expanding Access to Great Teachers

The success of classrooms—and students—starts with a great educator. But since not all educators are equally effective, is there a way to ensure that more students have access to the best in the field—especially our most disadvantaged students? As the U.S. Department of Education prepares to mandate a more "equitable distribution" of teachers (as excellent educators are encouraged or forced to move from one school to another), what is the best path forward?
 
Analyst Michael Hansen of the American Institutes for Research will present his findings from Right-Sizing the Classroom: Making the Most of Great Teachers, which examines giving excellent teachers more students—and rewarding them appropriately. Join the Fordham and AIR teams for a debate on the merits of such a policy and on other ways to increase student access to high-quality teachers.
 
PRESENTER
Michael Hansen - Senior Researcher, American Institutes for Research
 
DISCUSSANTS
Jean-Claude Brizard - Senior Advisor, College Board
Linda Donaldson Guidi - Instructional Coach and Teacher, Nashua, New Hampshire
Bryan C. Hassel - Co-Director, Public Impact
 
MODERATOR
Michael Petrilli - Executive Vice President ,Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Array ( [0] => 56619 [1] => 56617 [2] => 56620 [3] => 56621 [4] => 56622 [5] => 56623 [6] => 38572 )

If you want to understand why supporters of the Common Core are frustrated—OK, exasperated—by some of our opponents’ seemingly unlimited willingness to engage in dishonest debate, consider this latest episode.

On Monday, EAG News published an article entitled, “...

The seventh installment of the National Council on Teacher Quality’s State Teacher Policy Yearbook, which analyzes and grades state policies bearing on teacher quality, struck a guardedly optimistic tone. Between 2011 and 2013, thirty-one states strengthened their policies on teacher-...

As the number of chronically underperforming school districts continues to climb, some states are beginning to take control through Extraordinary Authority Districts (EADs). With lessons garnered from five that have employed various forms of EADs (Connecticut, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan...

In the midst of short-term and mostly small-scale snapshots measuring charter quality, this new Mathematica study brings a more panoramic portrait. Using longitudinal data, the authors sought to determine whether charter-school enrollment is indeed related to student success. As studies based on...

Rethinking Education Governance Lunchtime Keynote: Chris Cerf

During this lunchtime lecture, New Jersey Commissioner of Education Chris Cerf will discuss his thoughts on how to improve our current education-governance structure, drawing from his experiences as deputy chancellor of New York City Department of Education, his current role at the New Jersey Department of Education, and his time working for the federal government.

** We had some technical difficulties during the Q&A which is why the video is out of focus. We apologize for any inconvenience.

The seventh installment of the National Council on Teacher Quality’s State Teacher Policy Yearbook, which analyzes and grades state policies bearing on teacher quality, struck a guardedly optimistic tone. Between 2011 and 2013, thirty-one states strengthened their policies on teacher-quality standards. And since 2009, thirty-seven states have raised the bar for teacher qualification. Florida’s B+ earned it the highest overall score, and twelve more states earned a respectable B- or higher. However, not all the news is rosy. Montana earned an F for the third straight year. Worse, there seems to be a widening gap between states at the bottom and the top of the rankings. Still, NCTQ contends that there has been considerable improvement overall, especially in the areas of elementary-teacher preparation (twenty-four states have improved since 2011), evaluation of effectiveness (twenty-two states made progress), and elementary-teacher preparation in mathematics (twenty states bettered their grade).  That can only be good news.

SOURCE: Sandi Jacobs et al., 2013 State Teacher Policy Yearbook (Washington, D.C.: National Council on Teacher Quality, January 2014).

Categories: 
Array ( [0] => 56603 [1] => 56608 [2] => 56609 [3] => 56610 [4] => 56611 [5] => 56612 [6] => 56613 [7] => 56614 [8] => 56604 )

Editor’s note: This article wades into the ongoing debate over private school choice and public accountability. For background see here,...

This is a cliché by now, but the public schools where I live are producing test takers: pretty good ones, as far as the numbers show. At parent night at the beginning of the school year, we were introduced to a curricular program explicitly built around “assessments”—the new euphemism, I gather...

The court case over teacher job protections in California is underway. The plaintiffs argue that the laws hinder the removal of effective teachers, which...

With thirty-two cities across the nation placing more than 20 percent of their students in charter schools, it is clear that chartering has changed the face...

A new analysis by Mike Podgursky, Cory Koedel, and colleagues offers a handy tutorial of three major student growth measures and an argument for which one is best. The first, Student Growth Percentiles (aka the Colorado Growth Model), does not control for student background or differences in...

Like any relic of the industrial revolution, it’s time we took a wrench to the American education system. Or a bulldozer, argues Glenn Reynolds, distinguished professor of law at the University of Tennessee and InstaPundit blogger. In this book, he contends that the system will soon break down...

Into the messy and political world of teacher-effectiveness research enter Susanna Loeb and colleagues, who examine whether math and English-language-arts (ELA) teachers differ in how they impact students’ long-term knowledge. Specifically, they ask, among other questions, whether ELA and math...

The fancy-footwork edition

Mike welcomes Ohio's Chad to the podcast to disparage teacher tenure, anguish over the charter assault in Gotham, and debate the realities for charter schools in rural areas. Amber finds value in growth measures.

Amber's Research Minute

Choosing the Right Growth Measure,” by Mark Ehlert, Cory Koedel, Eric Parsons and Michael Podgursky, Education Next 14(2).

The Student and the Stopwatch

In this era of results-based academic accountability, teachers and their students spend class time taking—and preparing for—standardized tests. But just how much time? An inordinate amount? Does it vary by locale? What is the ideal amount of prep time? What are the policy implications for districts and states? The curricular and instructional implications? And what are the consequences for children, especially disadvantaged students?
 
JOIN THE DISCUSSION ON THE FORDHAM LIVE PAGE
 
In the largest study of its kind, Teach Plus brings empirical evidence to the table with its new report, The Student and the Stopwatch: How Much Time is Spent on Testing in American Schools? The report examines district- and state-required testing in more than thirty urban and suburban districts nationwide, featuring input from more than 300 teachers.
 
Join the Thomas B. Fordham Institute and Teach Plus for a discussion on time-on-testing in American classrooms.
 
Panel I
 
Joseph Espinosa - Instructional Coach, First Street Elementary, Los Angeles, California
Joe Gramelspacher - Math Teacher, Crispus Attucks High School, Indianapolis, Indiana
Christina Lear - English and Journalism Teacher, Herron High School, Indianapolis, Indiana
Dr. Joy Singleton Stevens - Third-Grade Teacher, Double Tree Montessori School, Memphis, Tennessee
 
Panel I Moderator
Alice Johnson Cain - Vice President for Policy, Teach Plus
 
Panel II
Celine Coggins - CEO and Founder, Teach Plus
Dave Driscoll - Chair, National Assessment Governing Board
Andy Rotherham - Co-founder and Partner, Bellwether Education Partners
 
Panel II Moderator
Michael J. Petrilli - Executive Vice President, Thomas B. Fordham Institute

The fancy-footwork edition

Mike welcomes Ohio's Chad to the podcast to disparage teacher tenure, anguish over the charter assault in Gotham, and debate the realities for charter schools in rural areas. Amber finds value in growth measures.

Amber's Research Minute

Choosing the Right Growth Measure,” by Mark Ehlert, Cory Koedel, Eric Parsons and Michael Podgursky, Education Next 14(2).

Into the messy and political world of teacher-effectiveness research enter Susanna Loeb and colleagues, who examine whether math and English-language-arts (ELA) teachers differ in how they impact students’ long-term knowledge. Specifically, they ask, among other questions, whether ELA and math teachers impact student performance in future years, not just in one—and whether that impact bleeds over by impacting not just knowledge in their own subject area but more generally in both subjects. They use extensive student, teacher, and administrative data from the NYC school system that includes roughly 700,000 third- and eighth-grade students from 2003–04 through 2011–12. There are three key findings: First, a teacher’s value added to ELA achievement has a crossover effect on long-term math performance, such that having a high-quality ELA teacher impacts not only ELA performance in a future year but future math performance, too; yet, math teachers have minimal impact on ELA performance in the long term. This may be due to the nature of ELA, since learning to read and think critically is likely to impact general knowledge, whereas math knowledge pertains more directly to the subject itself and math tests tend to be more aligned in content from year to year. Second, teachers in schools serving disadvantaged kids have less “persistence” (i.e., enduring impact) than their teaching peers with similar value-added scores in other schools, which could suggest that school-level curriculum choices make a difference—or perhaps that teachers in these schools prioritize short-term gains or teaching to the test. Third, within subjects, teachers...

Categories: 

A new analysis by Mike Podgursky, Cory Koedel, and colleagues offers a handy tutorial of three major student growth measures and an argument for which one is best. The first, Student Growth Percentiles (aka the Colorado Growth Model), does not control for student background or differences in schools but is calculated based on how a student’s performance on a standardized test compares to the performance of all students who received the same score in the previous year or who have a similar score history. Some like this model because it doesn’t set lower expectations for disadvantaged students by including background measures, but it may also penalize disadvantaged schools, since they tend to have lower growth rates. The second method, which they call the one-step value-added measure (VAM), controls for student and school characteristics, including prior performance, while simultaneously calculating test-score growth as a school average.  This model may detect causal impacts of schools and teachers, but runs the risk of not capturing important variables in the model, which could advantage high SES schools. The third and final model is a two-step VAM, designed to compare schools and teachers that serve similar students. It calculates growth for each school using test-score data that have been adjusted for various student and school characteristics. The analysts conclude that this model makes the most sense, because it levels the playing field so that winners and losers are representative of the system as a whole. What’s more, schools are more apt to improve if they...

Categories: 

Pages