1 / 40

Teaching Inequality

Teaching Inequality How Poor and Minority Students are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality and What We Can Do To Change It NCTAF Meeting St. Paul, MN July 2006 July 2006 A Fundamental, But Painful Truth

ostinmannual
Télécharger la présentation

Teaching Inequality

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Teaching Inequality How Poor and Minority Students are Shortchanged on Teacher Quality and What We Can Do To Change It NCTAF Meeting St. Paul, MN July 2006 July 2006

  2. A Fundamental, But Painful Truth Poor and minority children underachieve in school not only because they often enter behind, but also because the states and schools that are supposed to serve them actually shortchange them in the one resource they most need to reach their potential – high-quality teachers.

  3. Percent of Novice Teachers High-PovertyLow-Poverty Schools Schools High-MinorityLow-Minority Schools Schools Poor and Minority Students Are Taught by More Novice* Teachers *Teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience. Note: High-poverty schools are in the top quartile of schools with students eligible for free or reduced price lunch. Low-poverty schools are in the bottom quartile. High-minority schools are in the top quartile of minority enrollment. Low-minority schools are in the bottom quartile. Source: National Center for Education Statistics, “Monitoring Quality: An Indicators Report,” December 2000.

  4. Percent of secondary-level classes taught by an out-of-field teacher High-PovertyLow-Poverty Schools Schools High-MinorityLow-Minority Schools Schools More Classes in High-Poverty,High-Minority Secondary Schools Are Taught by Out-of-Field Teachers* (<15%) (<15%) (>50%) (>50%) * Teachers lacking a college major or minor in the field. Source: Craig D. Jerald, All Talk, No Action: Putting an End to Out-of-Field Teaching, The Education Trust, 2002.

  5. Percent of middle school classes taught by a teacher without at least a minor in the subject High-PovertyLow-Poverty Schools Schools High-MinorityLow-Minority Schools Schools Middle Grades – Classes Taught by Teachers Without at Least a College Minor in the Subject (<15%) (<15%) (>50%) (>50%) *Data is for core academic classes. Source: Craig D. Jerald, All Talk, No Action: Putting an End to Out-of-Field Teaching, The Education Trust, 2002.

  6. The very children who most needstrong teachers – low-income, minority, and low-performing children – are assigned, on average, to teachers with less experience, less education, and less skill than those who teach other children.

  7. Teacher Quality in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Illinois [Please refer to the report for more data and findings]

  8. Illinois: The Teacher Quality Index Developed by the Illinois Education Research Council • School Level Teacher Characteristics • % of Teachers with Emergency/Provisional Certification • % of Teachers from More/Most Selective Colleges • % of Teachers with < 4 Years Experience • % of Teachers Failing Basic Skills Test on First Attempt • School Average of Teachers’ ACT Composite and English Scores School Teacher Quality Index (TQI) Source: DeAngelis, K., Presley, J. and White, B. (2005). The Distribution of Teacher Quality in Illinois. Illinois Education Research Council.

  9. Illinois: Using the TQI to Rank Schools • Calculated TQI score for each school in the state • Ranked all the schools in the state from highest to lowest TQI • Divided that list into quartiles • In some cases, further subdivided the lowest quartile into lowest 10% and 11-25% • Examined schools by percent low-income and percent minority Source: DeAngelis, K., Presley, J. and White, B. (2005). The Distribution of Teacher Quality in Illinois. Illinois Education Research Council.

  10. <50% 50-89% 90-98% 99-100% School Percent Minority As Minority Enrollment Increases in Illinois, Teacher Quality Decreases Percent of Schools in Lowest TQI Quartile Source: Presley, J., White, B. and Gong, Y. (2005). Examining the Distribution and Impact of Teacher Quality in Illinois. Illinois Education Research Council.

  11. As Poverty Increases in Illinois, Teacher Quality Decreases Percent of Schools in Lowest TQI Quartile 0-9% 10-29% 30-49% 50-89% 90-100% School Percent Poverty Source: Presley, J., White, B. and Gong, Y. (2005). Examining the Distribution and Impact of Teacher Quality in Illinois. Illinois Education Research Council.

  12. Illinois Education Research Council’s College Readiness Index • Uses student ACT scores and self-reported GPA • Five levels of readiness: • Most ready • More ready • Somewhat ready • Minimally ready • Not/least ready Source: Presley, J. and Gong, Y. (2005). The Demographics and Academics of College Readiness in Illinois. Illinois Education Research Council

  13. Most / More College Ready Somewhat / Minimally College Ready Not / Least College Ready College Readiness Increases as Teacher Quality Increases Percent of Students Source: Presley, J. and Gong, Y. (2005). The Demographics and Academics of College Readiness in Illinois. Illinois Education Research Council.

  14. College Math Readiness is Affected More by Teacher Quality than by Courses Taken Percent of Students Most / More Ready Algebra II Trigonometry or other advanced math Calculus Lowest Quartile Lowest 11-25% TQI Lower- Middle TQI Quartile Upper- Middle TQI Quartile Highest TQI Quartile Lowest 10% TQI Source: Presley, J. and Gong, Y. (2005). The Demographics and Academics of College Readiness in Illinois. Illinois Education Research Council.

  15. Beyond Proxies: Data from Value-Added Research • Value-Added • Measures the amount of additional learning that a district, school, or teacher adds to their students during a school year • Based on the improvement of students from the beginning of the school year to the end

  16. Students Who Start 2nd Grade at About the Same Level of Math Achievement… Average Percentile Rank Source: Heather Jordan, Robert Mendro, and Dash Weerasinghe, The Effects of Teachers on Longitudinal Student Achievement, 1997.

  17. …Finish 5th Grade Math at Dramatically Different Levels Depending on the Quality of Their Teachers Average Percentile Rank Source: Heather Jordan, Robert Mendro, and Dash Weerasinghe, The Effects of Teachers on Longitudinal Student Achievement, 1997.

  18. Students Assigned to Effective Teachers Dramatically Outperformed Students Assigned to Ineffective Teachers Average Percentile Rank TCAP 5th Grade Math Source: William L. Sanders and June C. Rivers, Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Students Academic Achievement, University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center, 1996.

  19. Impact of effective teachers swamps almost every other intervention, including class size reduction.

  20. What can you do?Some actions for your consideration.

  21. Action 1: Get data systems in place. • Construct data systems that can answer distribution and efficacy questions • Implement a unique teacher and student identifier and link the two • States—fund system development • Identify models of data systems that work

  22. Action 2: Get value-added systems in place. Use the infatuation with growth model approaches to accountability to link necessary systems—specifically link teachers to their students.

  23. Action 3: Make tenure mean something. Bar granting of tenure to low value-added teachers.

  24. Action 4: Use value-added as heart of new system of teacher evaluation, along with other measures already in place.

  25. Action 5: Provide substantial bonuses to top quartile teachers who will teach in highest poverty/minority schools.

  26. Action 6: Attack inequities via finance and budgeting rules.

  27. Some of these differences occur between poor and rich school districts. But there are big differences within school districts, as well. In fact, in most states these differences are larger than between-district differences.

  28. California: Study after study shows large differences in experience and education of teachers in high vs. low-poverty schools. These differences, of course, are reflected in different salaries.

  29. A Tale of Two Schools Granada Hills High School Los Angeles Unified • 32% Latino & African American • 27% of students receive free or reduced price lunch • Academic Performance Index = 773 Locke High School Los Angeles Unified • 99% Latino & African American • 66% of students receive free or reduced price lunch • Academic Performance Index = 440 Source: CA Department of Education, 2003-04 data

  30. In accordance with district and state practice, both schools report the same average teacher salary.

  31. The average teacher at Locke High School actually gets paid an estimated $8,034 less every year than his counterpart at Granada Hills High School. If Locke spent as much as Granada Hills on teacher salaries for its 119 teachers, the school budget would increase by nearly a million dollars ($956,056) every year.

  32. You don’t have to just sit by and watch these inequities happen.You can change budgeting and reporting requirements.California did.Oakland did.

  33. Transparency & Budgeting • Districts should use weighted student formulas and require debiting of actual salaries, not average. • Transparency in spending on teacher salaries. • Add to school report cards data on actual teacher average salary • Add to school report cards data on the % of inexperience teachers (less than 2 years) • Require an annual report on the distribution of teacher talent, and state/district progress (in compliance with NCLB “equity provisions”)

  34. Action 7: Study and evaluate teacher preparation programs by the value-added of their graduates. Ohio does. Louisiana does.

  35. Action 8: Higher Education Reform • Ensure teacher prep programs focus on the power of teachers in HNS to turn students • Study school organization, instructional practices of effective HNS • Set goals for graduates in HNS • Collect and report quantity data (e.g., how many teachers go to HNS? How many stay?) • Collect and report quality data (e.g., value-added data on graduates)

  36. Action 9: Study the high performers. Use what you learn to reshape teacher preparation and professional development.

  37. Action 10: Leadership • Invest in preparing principals for HNS (e.g., knowing how to promote success in student learning, knowing how to hire strong teachers and how to evaluate effective teaching) • Tap into teacher leadership (create new roles for effective teachers)

  38. Action 11: Contract Provisions • Re-examine contracts with a focus on getting most talented teachers in HNS • States support districts that invite outside contract analysis • Move up hiring timelines • Consider earlier hiring timelines for high-needs schools (“the draft strategy”) • Allow principals/teachers in HNS to select teachers of their own choosing, and protect those teachers from being “bumped”

  39. Action 12: Recognition • Honor and celebrate strong teachers who teach in high needs schools (e.g., inviting teachers to serve on advisory committees, mayoral reception, listening to them)

  40. The Education Trust Heather G. Peske, Ed.D. Senior Associate for Teacher Quality (202) 293-1217 ext. 314 hpeske@edtrust.org www.edtrust.org

More Related