|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 116
5
Statistics Related to the Quality
of Science and Mathematics Teaching
As noted in previous chapters, the supply and demand for teachers of
mathematics is brought into equilibrium in the short term by adaptations in
the selection criteria for teacher or teaching quality. Thus a school system
unable to hire science and mathematics teachers at a preferred quality level
will have to lower its minimum quality requirements. Conversely, school
systems facing a supply of teachers of acceptable quality in excess of the
number they need will be able to choose those at the top of their quality
scale, thus ending up hiring teachers of higher quality than suggested
by their minimum criteria. While this comprises a generally accurate
description of school system hiring practices, it does not tell us anything at
all about what factors go into quality teachers or quality teaching. It is to
that topic that we now turn.
It should be recognized from the beginning that we do not have very
precise notions about what constitutes teacher or teaching quality, and thus
we cannot provide definitive prescriptions as to types of data that need
to be obtained in order to monitor either the level of teacher quality that
exists or changes over time in quality. The problem is that assessment
of quality is an extraordinarily difficult enterprise, and existing research
does not go very far in identifying the factors that determine quality. It is
the panel's view that the right dimensions of teacher or teaching quality
are factors that produce a positive influence on student outcomes that
is, higher quality in our view should be defined to mean better student
outcomes, given the influence of other forces besides teachers or school
system factors that influence student outcomes.
Perhaps the best way to summarize the current state of knowledge on
this topic is to note two sets of facts that come from existing studies of
teacher quality.
116
OCR for page 117
STATISTICS RELATED TO QUALITY
117
1. Teacher quality matters a good deal to student outcomes, in the
sense that it is possible to identify teachers who have produced well below
average outcomes. In this context, i~lentib simply means that specific
teachers can be shown to produce relatively good outcomes, and other
specific teachers can be shown to produce relatively poor outcomes (Contra
and Potter, 1980~.
2. If one tries to describe what factors are associated with teachers
who produce good outcomes or bad outcomes, one finds very little associa-
tion between particular characteristics of teachers and the resulting student
outcomes. That is, better formal credentials, better preparation in terms of
course work more years of teaching experience, better scores on standard
tests of teacher qualifications, etc., do not generally show up as teacher
characteristics that are strongly related to better or worse outcomes (Druva
and Anderson, 1983; Hanushek, 1986, 1989~. It has often been found that
teacher verbal ability is positively related to better student outcomes, but
the relationship is not exceptionally strong; most other factors do not show
up at all (Darling-Hammond and Hudson, 1986~.
In sum, we know that there must be characteristics of teachers or of
classroom situations that produce better student outcomes, and qualities or
characteristics that produce worse student outcomes, but we do not know
what these characteristics or qualities are with any degree of assurance.
Although it may be surprising to some readers that so little is known
about what factors are related to teacher or teaching quality, a little re-
flection suggests that it is not so unusual that the state of knowledge is
so limited. If one were to ask whether some people are more effective
social workers and others less effective, whether some people turn out to
be very successful business executives and others less so, or whether some
people are very successful at doing survey research interviews and others
are less successful, the answer in all these cases will surely be that there
are very large differences in the degree to which people are successful
or unsuccessful in particular kinds of professional activities. If one goes
further to ask what factors are associated with success in being a social
worker, a business executive, or a survey research interviewer, the answer
will commonly be that very little is known about why some people succeed
and others fail. The probable reasons are that the factors making for
success are complicated, that personal characteristics and characteristics of
the particular environment interact and may be idiosyncratic to particular
situations or types of work environments, and that success has a lot to
do with motivation, energy, striving for success, interpersonal skills, and
OCR for page 118
118
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AD ~THE~TICS TRACHEA
myriad other factors that come together in subtle ways to produce better
or worse outcomes.]
Given this state of knowledge, what should be done about the collection
of data that relate to teacher or teaching quality? It is the panel's view
that, although little is known about what factors are importantly related to
quality, something is known about the kinds of factors that probably play
some role in determining quality. We should try to collect the best such
set of factors, recognizing that the data collected will not be sufficient to
do a satisfactory job of explaining student outcomes. Thus in ' this section
we discuss a number of types of data that are probably related to quality,
although they have not been convincingly shown to be either strongly or
systematically reliable indicators of quality. These results may be caused by
systematic errors: for example, the better teachers teach higher-order skills,
but tests measure primarily lower-order skills, so the quality difference in
teaching is not measured.
The reader will note that we have talked about quality both in terms
of teacher quality and teaching quality. The two are not synonymous. By
teacher quality we mean those personal characteristics of individuals that
enable them to be more effective in classroom settings: education level,
subject matter knowledge, interpersonal skills in working with students,
degree of inservice training, formal credentials, etc. By teaching quality we
have in mind a somewhat broader notion that encompasses not only teacher
characteristics but also the school setting in which classroom teaching takes
place. Thus teaching quality includes factors that are beyond the control
of the 'individual teacher: disciplinary norms of the school system or of the
building principal, support given by principals to teachers, the presence or
absence of inse~vice training opportunities or opportunities for interaction
among teachers, types of textbooks that are selected for use in the school
systems, amount of time allocated to each subject, number of classroom
hours taught, and so on. Thus, teaching quality encompasses factors that
1The nature of the problem is illustrated by the example of survey research interviewing. This
subject has been studied for many decades, and what we know with certainty are only a few
relevant facts, none of which is sufficient to design a test to predict success at survey research
interviewing. There are enormous differences in degree of success. Some interviewers achieve
close to a 100 percent cooperation rate and have virtually no refusals, collect consistently high-
quality data, and do so with relatively few hours expended in the interviewing task and thus have
lower costs. Other interviewers have extremely high refusal rates, do not collect consistently
high-quality data, and take a great many hours to produce relatively mediocre results. Although
we know that these differences exist, it has not been possible to identify personal characteristics
that would enable survey research organizations to predict who will be a good interviewer and
who will not. Conventional demographic characteristics (educational level, experience, age, etc.)
are of virtually no use in explaining success. Although a few personality characteristics seem to
have some association with success, the state of knowledge is still relatively crude, despite a great
deal of methodological work.
OCR for page 119
STATISTICS BELA TED TO QUALITY
119
are not within the control of individual teachers, while teacher quality
includes only those factors that relate to the personal characteristics of
individual teachers.
In examining the quality of mathematics and science teachers, we
have in mind a broader notion than assessing the quality of teachers
who specialize in mathematics or science. Although some districts employ
teachers who specialize in science or mathematics as early as the fourth
grade, most teaching in mathematics in grades K-8 is done by teachers in
either elementary or middle school who may not be classified as science
or mathematics teachers, but rather as teachers who teach science and
mathematics. The distinction is important: we are interested in assessing
the quality of mathematics and science teaching on the part of teachers
who teach those subjects, and many of them probably most- are not
specialized in the teaching of either science or mathematics.
Moreover, we are also interested in those dimensions of quality that
relate to preferences of the school systems for the types of teachers they wish
to hire. It is clear enough from our case studies, as well as from extensive
discussions with the personnel directors of large city school systems, that
mathematics or science teachers are not hired solely for the perceived
quality of their mathematics or science teaching. Many school systems
have other dimensions of teacher performance in mind when they hire
teachers. In some school systems, the ability to fit in with the community
is important; in some, the ability to teach other subjects or to direct
extracurricular activities is important; in some, the ability to work with
the types of students in the school system is perceived to be extremely
important. The basic point is simple enough: school systems do not hire
teachers to teach science and mathematics solely because of their perceived
ability to be effective in classroom settings. Rather, hiring decisions are
influenced by a great many other factors, some of which will necessarily
result in hiring people who are likely to be less effective in teaching science
and mathematics than teachers who were not hired because they lacked
other skills or characteristics.
In the remainder of this chapter, we attempt to sort out the major
ingredients of teaching and teacher quality that call for further data. We
look first at school system policies and practices and the school-level condi-
tions that can affect teaching quality. Next we look at the qualifications of
incoming teachers their college and professional preparation, their level
of achievement in science and mathematics, their cognitive abilities, and so
on. Finally, we examine other factors that also influence student outcomes
but do- not fall neatly under either school system policies and practices or
teacher qualifications and characteristics: curriculum and textbook selection
issues, time-on-task issues, and issues relating to the home environments of
students. All of these do or may influence student outcomes to a substantial
OCR for page 120
120
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS TEACHERS
degree, and none is likely to be under the control of either the teacher or
the school principal.
SCHOOL SYSTEM POLICIES AND PRACTICES
The assignment of a teacher to courses and pupils appropriate to the
individual's educational background, certification status, and experience is
crucial to quality instruction in precollege mathematics and science. But
district personnel policies, budget constraints, and other external factors
can impede the ability to achieve the most effective match.
A policy maker with the specific goal of higher~uality instruction
often finds that it is difficult to change many of the policy variables that
affect the quality of instruction. District policies exist in a complex web
of competing goals and pressures. Even if the central goal is quality
teaching, the policy maker must also consider school system policies and
union contract provisions regarding recruitment, initial assignment, and
transfer and retention of teachers. A given set of policy guidelines can
have quite different effects depending on whether enrollment is stable,
growing, or declining. For example, seniority rules for assignment or
transfer have different effects in environments in which enrollments are
rising or declining. Personnel policies are also affected by the enrollment
size of a particular school system, the enrollment size of a high school, the
extent to which the curriculum is taught by specialists, and the match among
educational background, teaching assignment, and teacher and student
cultures.
Recruitment and Hiring Practices
Certain policies set by the school district, teacher organization, or state
school finance plan can have deleterious effects on the ability to hire the
most talented teachers. The examples given here apply not only to science
and mathematics teachers but probably also to teachers in general.
Discussions with personnel offices of large school systems suggested
that recruitment of new teachers by large districts with diverse student pop-
ulations was often hindered by the fact that recruiters could not specie the
school to which the applicant would be assigned. Many persons would find
such a school system desirable only if they could teach in a given section of
the school system or in a specified school. Since recruiters could not make
such commitments, or could not make those commitments early enough
in the recruitment period, candidates were lost to the school system. This
problem stemmed from district policies related to the timing of hiring, in-
te~viewing, and specific placement. District policy in some systems requires
OCR for page 121
STATISTICS RELATED TO QUALITY
121
the applicant to be interviewed 'only by the district administrator; subse-
quent assignment is a central office decision. Other district administrators
screen applications and refer promising candidates directly to principals,
who conduct the interviews.
The uncertainty of initial assignment also seemed to be exacerbated
by seniority rules of internal transfer. In one medium-sized school district
in a western state that participated in our case study analysis, internal
transfer rules took months to implement. With a tendency for junior high
science and mathematics teachers to request high school positions, and
for elementary teachers to request junior high positions, the process of
considering all transfer applications and then determining which positions
were actually vacant continued well into the summer. Job offers could
not be made until August. Since other districts could make job offers in
March and April, this district was left with candidates who had not obtained
positions elsewhere.
In some circumstances, the problems stemming from seniority rules
become especially severe when combined with rehiring rights after teachers
have been laid off due to enrollment decline or financial constraints. In
such circumstances, district rules, regulations, and practices rather than pro-
fessional judgment often seemed to determine the match between teacher
and classroom assignment. For example, seniority rules may restrict new
hires to the least desirable schools in the district. These rules may drive
teachers not only from the school system but also from the profession. Se-
niority rights may also prevail when teachers are transferred among schools.
When vacancies occur, the teacher with the greatest longevity in the school
system may have first choice. When enrollment declines, teachers with
higher longevity in the school system, the school, or a teaching field may
have rights to bump less senior teachers. The length of the waiting period
before opening vacancies to outside applicants greatly affects the district's
ability to sign on talented applicants. Many officials said they lose good
annlicants to cipher districts whose rules or budgets allowed them to hire
err -^ -^
sooner.
Enrollment size and composition also influence district policies. The
hiring restrictions of one large urban school system in the West contrasted
starkly with the innovative practices for meeting future needs employed
by a small suburban school system in the same region. The suburban
superintendent, in conjunction with a nearby college, recruited well-trained
graduates to fill projected vacancies. The smaller enrollment size and
relative wealth of the suburban school system, as well as the homogeneity of
the student population, accounted for the differences in practices between
the suburban and the urban systems. In another suburban school system in
the East, a teacher who attracted high school students to advanced science
classes had been allowed to develop his own teaching assignment. Such
OCR for page 122
122
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND 1~4THEMi4TICS TEACHERS
flexibility is less likely in a larger school system concerned with uniform
course offerings among schools. One of the reasons for more rules, and
sometimes less flexible ones, in larger school systems is the need to adhere
to goals of equity among staff members in conditions of employment.
Factors external to the school district can also affect local hiring prac-
tices. Increases in state-mandated graduation requirements for mathematics
or science can cause the district to fill vacancies in those fields with teach-
ers not yet certified in the particular subjects, in order to meet the state
requirement.
As noted in Chapter 2, 42 states have added requirements in science
or mathematics since 1983. The Center for Policy Research in Education
(CPRE), which has surveyed the states' graduation requirements, has found
that in schools affected, about 27 percent of students are taking an extra
mathematics course and 34 percent an extra science course (CPRE 1989:33~.
Many of these student are middle- to low-achieving, the CPRE study
relates (p. 35~. CPRE inquired as to the nature or level of the additional
courses. In many instances the added courses were remedial or lowerlevel
science and mathematics courses (p. 35-36~. The increased requirements
undoubtedly have changed schools' staffing patterns and course assignments
and have probably affected hiring practices for science and mathematics
teachers.
State-mandated minimum competency test scores and state school-
finance formula constraints on local funds for laboratory equipment and
supplies, computers, teacher aides, or teacher salaries are other external
factors that local personnel officials must take into consideration in hiring
teachers. An unintended consequence of decisions made under these
conditions may be a loss in teacher or teaching quality.
Of course, not all rules act to restrict supply or make the task of
matching persons and assignments more difficult; certain rules may benefit
some school systems. When there is a potential for future growth in high
school enrollments, teachers in a school system may pursue advanced study
so that they can move from elementary school or junior high to high
school. Other teachers may be attracted to begin their career in the district
with a thought toward future advancement. Without seniority rules, there
would be no such encouragement, as new hires might occupy newly created
positions in high schools.
Data are needed to better describe the incidence of these and other
policies and practices that affect the ability to hire and place the most
promising candidates to assure instruction of high quality. The Schools and
Staffing Survey (SASS) does not yet provide data related to most of these
areas. In-depth conferences with a sample of SASS districts on a regular
basis are recommended (see Chapter 6) to gain more accurate insights into
the use of such policies and practices.
OCR for page 123
STATISTICS RELATED TO QUALITY
123
Misassignment of Teachers
Teacher assignment is critical to quality instruction in all subjects, es-
pecially so for science and mathematics. Misassignment of science teachers
can occur when a vacancy in a science specials is filled with a certified
science teacher who is unfamiliar with that particular field. High schools
may be too small to have a full-time chemistry or physics teacher or even
a full-time biology teacher.2 In 1986-87, only 13 percent of teachers who
taught physics in secondary schools had teaching assignments in physics
alone. Almost two-thirds of the teachers who taught physics had their
primary concentration of classes in chemistry, mathematics, or general and
physical science (American Institute of Physics, 1988:17~. There may be a
need for one but not two science teachers. The same type of misassign-
ment can occur in mathematics, when a teacher is trained to teach areas
of mathematics other than that assigned or some other subject altogether.
In many states, it is legal to assign a teacher to teach part time in an area
in which the teacher is not certified, under a practice called out-of-field
teaching as opposed to "misassignment" (Robinson, 1985~.
Estimates of the prevalence of misassignment based on data from
the early 1980s collected by the National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES) and the National Education Association (NEA) vary considerably.
In a preliminary report on indicators of precollege education in science
and mathematics, the National Research Council (NRC) notes the erosion
of the quality of the existing teaching pool by misassignment of newly
certified teachers. This report cites NCES findings that, among bachelor's
degree recipients in 1979-80 who were teaching elementary or secondary
2 In one of the case studies, the employment of a full-time chemistry teacher by a school system
was mentioned. This condition was treated as rare for the school systems studied. Such employ-
ment can be seen as unusual for the United States by examining some necessary conditions. If
one assumes that a teacher teaches 5 classes and that a class has between 25 and 30 students, then
to teach a single subject at the same grade level requires 125 to 150 students per grade level. For
a 4-year high school this means a school enrollment size of 500 to 600. For a 3-year high school,
it means an enrollment size of 375 to 400. In 1982-83 9.5 percent of secondary students attended
schools below the latter size criterion. An additional 10.5 percent of secondary students met the
former criterion. If only half of the students take a chemistry course, then slightly more than half
of the students, 53.3 percent, attend such secondary schools. If only a third of the students take
a chemistry course, then only slightly more than 10 percent of secondary students (13.4 percent)
attend schools of that enrollment size (ACES, 1986:68~. That only a third of secondary students
are likely to take a chemistry course can be garnered from the fact that 65.4 percent of public
secondary school students take natural science (p. 41), and the average number of Carnegie units
(a standard of measurement that represents one credit for the completion of a one-year course)
in natural science is 1.9 (p. 44~. Expanding the ranges of possible courses in natural science to
include two courses in chemistry or chemistry and physics would indicate that only 3.9 percent
of schools, that is, the schools with larger enrollments that enroll 13.4 percent of the students,
would be able to hire a full-time chemistry or physics teacher.
OCR for page 124
124
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS TEACHERS
school full time in May 1981, only 45 percent of science teachers and 42
percent of mathematics teachers were certified or eligible to be certified
in the field in which they were teaching (NRC, 1985:52~. More recently,
Darling-Hammond and Hudson (1987a:21) reported "estimates that vary
depending on who is asked to estimate the degree of misassignment (school
administrators versus teachers) and on how misassignment is defined." They
reported (1987a:21~:
· Not certified in area of primary assignment: 9-11 percent by teacher
report, 3.4 percent from central office administrators' estimates (NEA,
1982; NCES, 1985a).
Not certified for some classes taught: 16 percent by teacher report (NEA,
1982).
Less than a college minor in area of primary assignment: 17 percent by
secondary school teacher report (Carroll, 1985).
The 1985 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education
found higher proportions for science and mathematics 18 percent of grade
7-9 mathematics teachers and 14 percent of grade 10-12 mathematics
teachers teach courses for which they are uncertified. For science teachers,
the percentages are 25 for grades 7-9 and 20 for grades 10-12 (Weiss,
1987:77-88~.
Transfer policies can sometimes lead to a misassignment and thwart
a teacher's potential for advancement. In our contacts with school district
administrators, a tendency was reported for principals to transfer teachers
from subject fields of surplus to subject fields of need. Often, these trans-
fers moved the teachers from their primary subject fields to different areas.
Transfers of this nature took place due to changes in student demand for
subjects under stable enrollments as well as in times of changing enroll-
ments. Such transfers also occurred because principals sought teachers able
or willing to handle extracurricular tasks such as athletics, the school paper,
the yearbook, or student clubs.
The extent to which misassignment occurs today in science and math-
ematics may be greater than for other subjects. Data on the extent of
misassignment for all fields at the school district level will be obtainable
from the SASS Teacher Demand and Shortage questionnaire. It will also
be possible to estimate misassignment by field by using the SASS teacher
questionnaire. This questionnaire obtains courses currently taught by each
departmental teacher, the teacher's arrears) of certification, and college
major and minor. Estimates of misassignment by field as defined by certi-
fication status can be made using these data.
Since certification standards vary so much across states, the fact that
one was not certified in the field in which one is teaching does not
necessarily mean misassignment. To obtain a more complete picture of
OCR for page 125
STATISTICS RELATED TO QUALITY
125
misassignment, information on inservice training and actual course-taking
preparation should also be analyzed, as Darling-Hammond and Hudson
suggest (1987a: 21-22~. The SASS teacher questionnaire represents a
promising step forward. It requests data not only on certification status (as
above), but also on degrees earned and major and minor fields of study,
amount of course work in primary and secondary teaching assignment
fields, and, for teachers who teach any science or mathematics courses, the
number of graduate and undergraduate courses taken in various categories.
These are rich data to examine misassignment and out-of-field teaching.
Information from SASS should be analyzed together with state certifi-
cation data on the number of emergency certificates issued in science and
mathematics; 46 states allow emergency certification. Of these, 30 require
university course work in order to renew and work toward full certification
(McKibbin, 1988:32~. Supplementary data would include state rules on the
extent to which out-of-field assignment is legal. Such information from
various sources, when analyzed jointly, will help monitor the extent and
trends of misassignment in science and mathematics teaching.
Providing for Inservice and Continuing Education
Some of the most important district and school practices that affect
the quality of instruction are those directed to teachers already in place.
maintain quality instruction throughout their careers, teachers require
professional support from their schools and districts. This support includes
working conditions, facilities such as laboratories, materials and supplies,
collegial and administrative support, resources for continuing education,
and opportunities to influence decision making (Darling-Hammond and
Hudson, 1987a:27-37~.
District practices regarding inservice and continuing higher education
for teachers in place affect teacher quality directly and can make it more
or less attractive for a teacher to continue in a district. School districts
have been the primary sponsors of inservice programs, but such programs
are highly vulnerable to district budget cuts.
Decisions as to what kinds of inservice education to fund with a limited
budget affect teaching quality in ways that data alone may be unable to
illustrate. In one large, suburban, low-wealth district we studied, much
of the staff development budget was geared to weaker teachers. Teachers
had little release time during the school year 17 days allotted for each
high school. Only about 20 percent of staff development was used for
college-level course work.
A national commitment to teachers' continuing education appears
to be missing. The federal government does support inservice education
through the Title II program of the Education for Economic Security
OCR for page 126
126
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND M'4THEAL4 TICS TEACHERS
Act of the Department of Education and through the National Science
Foundation (NSF) Teacher Enhancement Program (Office of Technology
Assessment, 1988:69), but funding for both activities is severely limited.
Appropriations for the Title II program have been uneven, dropping from
$100 million in fiscal year 1985 to $42 million in 1986, then $80 million,
$120 million, and $127 million in 1987, 1988, and 1989, respectively (OTA,
1988:123; U.S. Department of Education, 1989~. These are small amounts
when viewed on a per-pupil or per-teacher basis. The Office of Technology
Assessment notes by comparison that a $40 million education program
equates to a spending of $1 per pupil or $20 per teacher (1988:123~. NSF's
Teacher Enhancement Program funds a small program of teacher institutes
emphasizing teaching techniques in science and mathematics. The institute
program is much smaller than it was in the past. Between 1954 and 1974
NSF spent over $500 million on teacher training institutes that at their peak
involved 40,000 teachers (OTA, 1988:119-120~. The Teacher Enhancement
Program has been revived somewhat since 1982, when it was virtually
nonexistent. According to Charles Hudnall of the NSF staff, from 1983,
when $11 million were appropriated, it has grown steadily to $43 million in
1989.
There is little national information available on the extent to which
inservice programs other important professional resources are used.
Most of the existing data on this topic were collected from teachers,
through self-reporting, in 1985-86 and reported in Weiss (1987~. The SASS
local education agency questionnaire asks whether the district reimburses
teachers' tuition and course fees. It also asks whether free retraining is
available for teachers for shortage areas, and what those shortage areas
are. The school questionnaire for the 1990 follow-up of NELS:88 asks
principals (primarily of middle or junior-high schools) whether teachers
are rewarded with time off for professional workshops, extra materials,
choice of classes, etc. Teachers in NELS:88 are asked about the number
of hours spent on noncollege inservice education. The NEA Survey of the
American Public School Teacher (described in Appendix B) includes three
fairly detailed items concerning inservice of various types over the past
three years, including how much of the teacher's own money was spent on
college credit programs.
More data on policies related to inservice and other professional
programs are needed from school districts. Among useful measures to
obtain on inservice program use would be the number of hours of inse~vice
training in mathematics, science, and related pedagogy accumulated in the
last 12 months. Graduate courses should be distinguished from refresher
workshops. Substantial inservice work in the form of graduate courses in
one's primary field may indicate a high level of quality and professionalism
or the intent to move from middle school to high school. The SASS teacher
OCR for page 146
146
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS TEACHERS
teacher quality or student outcome. Thus, it is important that the National
Science Foundation fund a program of controlled experiments on factors
that do measure teacher or teaching quality. Such research would include
identifying the relationship between measurable teacher qualifications and
student outcomes.
If the Carnegie or Holmes recommendations for higher professional
standards are adopted, the consequent changes in the teaching force should
be monitored, together with any changes in supply as a result of the more
rigorous requirements.
Other factors beyond teacher quality-such as textbook use, time
commitments, the structure of science and mathematics curricula, and home
environment were noted as influences on teaching quality and student
outcomes. These factors complicate any attempts to link outcomes with
particular teacher qualifications.
In conclusion, to understand the crucial role of quality in bringing
supply and demand for precollege science and mathematics teachers into
equilibrium in the short term, we have acknowledged some rather daunting
data needs and research issues. We realize that these needs might not be
able to be met completely enough to introduce teacher quality measures
into teacher supply models in the near future. But successful collection of
more precise data, particularly through SASS and existing state information
files, can be expected to contribute to an understanding of teacher quality,
and additional research may help identify the characteristics of teachers
and teaching that are determinants of student outcomes.
OCR for page 147
-
CQ
,n
-
He
-
o
o
v
a]
o
v
a]
so
4~
· -
o
· -
v
· -
it
v
L.
v
it
v
q)
· -
a]
cs
ce
· -
~c
cS
c;
u,
m
z ~
.= ~ ~
~ .~ ._
L ,1:
V ~
~ ~ X
U] ~ ~
a~
._
_ ~ - E
(V .-
U CO
_ ._
[U ~
~ cn
._
o
._
._
v
:^
a~
._
v
a~
v
.o
m v .=
v n5
·- Ll -
~ m ~
a~
V
._
~ C~
~ ~fi ~ ~
o
z ~o ~i,, o
o 4, o o ~ o
Z ~ Z ~ Z
-
_
CQ ~
_
OO
~0
_ ~
O ~ {D O O
e~ Z co c ~e~ c ~eo e ~,
t_° O ~00 ~0 0 0
o: e~ ~=1 ~ co co e~
Ut
~.
r ~° 0 ~ ut Oo ~0 0 0
c~ Z co c~ ~=1 ~ eo co e~
L.
C. Z c°o , I "Q1 , , co ,
t_ ° O -4
e~ Z ~ ~ ~1 ~ co c~ e ~CD
r~
.. ~-c =~ ~ ° o ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ E
¢ ¢ ¢ ~ v v v
147
OCR for page 148
:~
a
-
a'
L.
in
-
o
us
En
o
v,
Al
· -
o
·
·
v
In
· -
c)
I]
to
· -
In
~4
~ o
v
l
m ~
¢ =}
~ be
·=
~
X
U] ~ ~
Do
._
.~ ~ C) ~
V
C.
al ~
'D ·o
~ CQ
-
._
o
._
v
._
Ld
v
00
._
L.
v
L'
o
v
-
V]
O ~ ~ ~
._ ~ ~ ~
m v .- ~
-
.o O
V
cn m ~
~ 00
._
C~ C~
L.
3 ~
~l o ~
~Q1 ~ ~o ~ ~ =1 cs, cn co c9 co ~ ~(D
w w w
o ~ ~ o o
Ql Z ~ ~1 ~ Z
-
V)
oo oo W W
~ ~ ~ O ~
~ ~ ~ Z ~1 ~
CD ~e ~CD ~e~
rQI I I a, e~ QlI cO I o' a, I o1 `O
O ~ ~O O ~ C9 o e~
Ql c~ c ~o~ c~ ~Ico ~I e~ cO cO ~I cO
O ~CO ~O O ~ CD O e~
~21 c~ e ~co e~ Qlco c ~I e~ a) a) oI cO
u~ e ~oo oo co CD ~
1 ~ eo 1 e~ =1 ~ 1 _~ CO CO CO L~1 1
O . ~CO ~O O oo ~ ~ O
~1 c~ e ~ e~ =1 co c ~_~ e~ co o~ o1 e~
o,
~ ~, ~._
- o oC ~ ~ 5 ~.= ~ ~ ~ ~.=
O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
148
OCR for page 149
~ I ~ ~u:
go ° at oO~:21 al CO ~ ~-
- -
~ ~ ~ O 0 ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~
~ ~ ~ ~=1 Z ~ Z ~ ~ Z ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ill
2 m° tD =1 ~ ~ tD of 1 m° ~ ~ =1 I,' m° °° °° 'I
0 ~
o ~ ~ o o
z
go o ~
1 o1 -~ of Z
L.
o O ~ co to ~ to Q1 to 0 us en ~to ~ ~
e~ 40 e~ _ ~21 ·~ ~ 4O Vl CO ~ ~ =1 ~ ~ ~ ~Vl -~ O~ Z
0 0 ~ ~O ~ ~O O u, 0 0 e~ ~ ~oO
c~ co e~ _ ~Q1 co e~ cO Vl 01 0~ ~P ~ ^1 cO CO ~ ~C~ O1 -
0 0 ~o cs) 0 ~O O ~0 0 0_1 00 00 a, ~
03 CD ~ CO =1 co e~ ~O1 O1 C9 ~ --Q1 cv o ~oOe~ ~ Vl - ~Z
L L
O O O CD o ~ ~O O ~O O 00 CS ~0O
tr~ ~O ¢O _4 =1 tO e~ e ~Ol Vl CO ~ e~ =1 tO CO _~ {O e~ O1 ~l
C~
_ o ~ > 3 ~ 3 ~ o D o ~ ~ ~ = 0 C ~ ~ ~8 ~ 8~ ~ ~
~ ~ z ~z ~ z ~ z z o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
149
OCR for page 150
al
Em
-
o
o
Id
o
c)
u]
s~
· -
o
.
·
v
s"
e
· -
c)
u]
~n
. -
-
.-
C53
m
¢
~
P4
¢ V]
:> ._ ._
· ~ ~ ~
._
b4 ·
·=
. ~ ~C
~U .O
~ C)
q) C
~ ._
~ U)
"C
L4
_ ._
.w ~
~ U)
-
._
o
._
C.
C)
._
v
J:2
00
._
v
0G
o
v
0t ~ -~m
O
._ ~ ~ ~C
m v .- ~
.O O
~ ~ 4,
cn m ~
~ 03
._
CC ~
~2
S~
o
U)
-~ ~1 u, _
O ~ O
Z; CJ1 ~ Z;
~ e~
I o1 co _
e~
Q1 co
Vl a,
~P 0
u' Vl u: CO
e~ Vl CO e~
._
bO C bO
.= ~
3 3 ~ 3
150
. ~
~.k
o ,~
._ ~V
C. ~C.
E ceE E
11 ~ °
~o~ _
o ~ ~
"C ~ V
. ~ ~
o
C) ~o
l.4 ·~V
Ll Q.
o~ ~
b~ O
11 .=~ ~
, C) ~C
~o ~_
·o o ~
V ~o
·-
. ~ ,- ta b
,~ o C C C
~11 _ , 4,
o~Ce ~V ~
V ~ o
- ~ E ~ ° °°
~, =: ._ ~ o ~
_
_ ~ E ~ y c
E ~ ~E ~ > 0
c a c C .E c
c, ~ `<, ,, E
u c~ o, [= O . ~O
~I Q'1 o1 0
OCR for page 151
STATISTICS RELATED TO QUALITY
APPENDIX TABLE 5.2 Guidelines for Mathematics and Science Teacher
Qualifications Specified by the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics (NCTM) and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA)
151
NCTM Guidelines
Early elementary school
The following 3, each of which
presumes a prerequisite of 2
years of high school algebra
and 1 year of geometry:
1. number systems
2. informal geometry
3. mathematics teaching
methods
Upper elementary and
middle school
The following 4 courses, each
of which presumes a
prerequisite of 2 years of
high school algebra and 1 year
of geometry:
1. number systems
informal geometry
3. topics in mathematics
(including real number
systems, probability and
statistics, coordinate
geometry, and number
theory)
4. mathematics methods
Junior high school
The following 7 courses,
each with a prerequisite of
3 to 4 years of high school
mathematics, beginning with
algebra and including
trigonometry:
1. calculus
2. geometry
3. computer science
4. abstract algebra
5. mathematics applications
6. probability and statistics
7. mathematics methods
NSTA Standards
Elementary level
1. Minimum 12 semester hours in laboratory-
or field-oriented science including courses
in biological, physical, and earth sciences.
These courses should provide science content
that is applicable to elementary classrooms.
2. Minimum of 1 course in elementary science
methods (approximately 3 semester hours) to
be taken after completion of content courses.
3. Field experience in teaching science to
elementary students.
Middle/junior high school level
1.
Minimum 36 semester hours of science
instruction with at least 9 hours in each
of biological or earth science, physical
science, and earth/space science.
Remaining 9 hours should be science
electives.
2. Minimum of 9 semester hours in support
areas of mathematics and computer science.
3. A science methods course designed for the
middle school level.
4. Observation and field experience with
early adolescent science classes.
Secondary level
General standards for all science
specialization areas:
1. Minimum 50 semester hours of course
work in 1 or more sciences, plus
study in related fields of mathematics,
statistics, and computer applications.
2. Three- to 5-semester-hour course in
science methods and curriculum.
3. Field experiences in secondary science
classrooms at more than 1 grade
level or more than 1 science area.
OCR for page 152
152
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS TEACHERS
(Appendix Table 5.2, continued)
NCTM Guidelines
NSTA Standards
Senior high school
The following 13 courses,
which constitute an under-
graduate major in mathematics,
each presume a prerequisite of
3 to 4 years of high school
mathematics, beginning with
algebra and including
trigomometry:
1-3. 3 semesters of calculus
4. computer science
5-6. linear and abstract
algebra
7. geometry
8. probability and statistics
9-12. 1 course each in:
mathematics methods,
mathematics applications,
selected topics, and the
history of mathematics
13. at least 1 additional
mathematics elective
course Specialized
standards
Specialized standards
1. Biology: minimum 32 semester hours
of biology plus 16 semester hours
in other sciences.
2. Chemistry: minimum 32 semester hours
of chemistry plus 16 semester hours
in other sciences.
Earth/space science: minimum 32
semester hours of earth/space science,
specializing in one area (astronomy,
geology, meteorology, or oceanography),
plus 16 semester hours in other sciences.
4. General science: 8 semester hours each
in biology, chemistry, physics, earth/
space science, and applications of
science in society. Twelve hours
in any 1 area, plus mathematics to
at least the precalculus level.
Physical science: 24 semester hours in
chemistry, physics, and applications
to society, plus 24 semester hours
in earth/space science; also an
introductory biology course.
Physics: 32 semester hours in
physics, plus 16 in other sciences.
5.
6.
Source: Office of Technology Assessment (1988:64) .
OCR for page 153
STATISTICS RELATED TO QUAL17-Y
153
APPENDIX TABLE 5.3 States That Have Enacted Testing Programs for Initially
Certifying Teachers: Fall 1987
State Enacted Effective Test Useda
Alabama 1980 1981 State
Arizona 1980 1980 State
Arkansas 1979 1983 NTE
California 1981 1982 CBEST
Colorado 1981 1983 CAT
Connecticut 1982 1985 State
Delaware 1982 1983 PPST
Florida 1978 1980 State
Georgia 1975 1980 State
Hawaii 1986 1986 NTE
Idaho 1987 1988 NTE
Illinois 1985 1988 State
Indiana 1984 1985 NTE
Kansas 1984 1986 NTE and PPST
Kentucky 1984 1985 NTE
Louisiana 1977 1978 NTE
Maine 1984 1988 NTE
Maryland 1986 1986 NTE
Massachusetts 1985 b b
Michigan 1986 1991 b
Minnesota 1986 1988 PPST
Mississippi 1975 1977 NTE
Missouri 1985 1988 b
Montana 1985 1986 NTE
Nebraska 1984 1989 b
Nevada 1984 1989 PPST and State
New Hampshire 1984 1985 PPST and NTE
New Jersey 1984 1985 NTE
New Mexico 1981 1983 NTE
New York 1980 1984 NTE
North Carolina 1964 1964 NTE
North Dakota 1986 b b
Ohio 1986 1987 NTE
Oklahoma 1980 1982 State
Oregon 1984 1985 CBEST
Pennsylvania 1985 1987 State
Rhode Island 1985 1986 NTE
South Carolina 1979 1982 NTE and State
South Dakota 1985 1986 NTE
Tennessee 1980 1981 NTE
OCR for page 154
154
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS TEACHERS
APPENDIX TABLE 5.3 Continued
State Enacted Effective Test Useda
Texas 1981 1986 State
Virginia 1979 1980 NTE
Washington 1984 b
West Virginia 1982 1985 State
Wisconsin 1986 1990 b
a Tests:
CAT = California Achievement Test;
CBEST = California Basic Skills Test;
NTE = National Teacher Examination;
PPST = Pre-Professional Skills Test;
b State = State-developed test.
-To be determined.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics (1988f:249-250~.
OCR for page 155
STATISTICS RELATED TO QUALITY
APPENDIX TABLE 5.4 Comparison of Recommendations of Carnegie and Holmes
Reports Pertaining to Preservice Education of Teachers
Category of
Recommenda-
tion
Fifth Year of
Study
Carnegie Report a
Require bachelors degree in
the arts and sciences as
prerequisite of professional
study of teaching. Require
a master's degree for all
teachers.
Curriculum Develop new professional
Revision curriculum in graduate
schools of education leading
to Master in Teaching degree
based on systematic
knowledge of teaching and
including internships and
residencies in schools.
Coordination Connect institutions of
higher education with
schools through the
development of professional
development schools.
Certification Create a national board for
professional teaching
standards to establish high
standards for what teachers
need to know and to be able
to do, and to certify
teachers who meet that
standard.
155
Holmes Group b
Make education of teachers more
solid intellectually by pursuing an
undergraduate major in an academic
subject other than education,
receive their professional training
in a fifth year master's degree
program, and complete a year-long
supervised internship.
Revise undergraduate curriculum
in arts and sciences. Organize
academic course requirements,
including involvement of other
departments in institutions of
higher education. Need advanced
studies inpedagogy (focus on
human cognition, teaching and
learning, and teaching), teachers'
learning, assessment of
professional performance, and
evaluation of instruction.
Need coherent program in schools
and institutions of higher educa-
tion that will support advanced
study. Create professional
development schools, similar to
teaching hospitals, in which
prospective teachers would receive
their clinical training.
Create 3-tier systems of teacher
licensing:
0 Instructor--has BA degree,
without year of supervised
practice and study in
pedagogy and human learning;
has passed exams (see
evaluation)
Professional teacher--has MA
in teaching; completed year
of supervised practice;
passed exams
0 Career professional--has
completed all of the above
plus further specialized study
a
OCR for page 156
156
APPENDIX TABLE 5.4, continued
PRECOLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS TEACHERS
Category of
Recommenda-
tion
Carnegie Report a
Holmes Group b
Evaluation/
Assessment
Differential Restructure teaching force
Staffing and introduce new category
of lead teachers with proven
ability to provide active
leadership in redesign of
schools and in helping
colleagues to uphold high
standards of learning and
teaching.
Use multiple evaluations
o Test basic mastery of writing
and speaking
o Demonstrate mastery of
subject, skill in lesson
planning, and instructional
delivery prior to clinical
internship
0 Evaluate variety of teaching
styles during internship--
including own--and present
analytic evidence as part of
professional portfolio for
advancement
Recognize differences in teacher's
knowledge, skill, and commitment
in their education, certification,
and work.
a Carnegie Task Force on Teaching as a Profession (1986) A Nation Prepared:
Teachers for the 21st Century,. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Forum on Education
and the Economy. Pp. 55-56.
b The Holmes Group (1986) Tomorrow's Teachers: A
Group. East Lansing: The Holmes Group, Inc. Pp. 65-66.
Report of the Holmes
Source: Regional Laboratory for Educational Improvement of the Northeast and
Islands (1987:15-17~.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
student outcomes
