The Center for Education Data & Research (CEDR) has released a study that examines teacher preparation programs in Washington State, in an effort to determine a link between program efficacy and teacher effectiveness. Comparing data between teacher’s initial endorsements and student achievement on state math and reading tests, the study found that teacher prep programs within the state of Washington “produce teachers who are no more or less effective” than those trained out-of-state. However, the study did find that in a number of cases, there are statistically significant differences in the effectiveness of teachers based on their training program.
The study came to several conclusions of interest to the education community at large. First, teachers make the most gains in effectiveness during their second to fourth year of teaching. After 5 years, there appears to be little change in teacher effectiveness. Second, there is little evidence that the students of teachers who earn graduate degrees benefit from increased effectiveness, though the teachers themselves are generally more productive. However, the data did not allow the researchers to assess whether there is a difference in effectiveness between teachers who hold bachelor’s degrees and those who earned their master’s degrees from a given program.
The researchers’ findings also suggest that the state in which teachers receive their initial credentials only explains a small part of the overall variation in teacher effectiveness. The differential in average effectiveness comes in large part from the program the teacher participated in to get credentialed and plays at least as big of a role in effectiveness as years of experience and degree level. Teacher prep programs that are credentialing teachers more effective in math also tend to credential teachers who are more effective in reading.
The average difference between teachers who receive a credential from the least and most effective programs is about 7 percent of a standard deviation in math and 10 percent of a standard deviation in reading. These differences are twice as large as the estimated improvement found in the 1 – 2 years beyond the first year of teaching. Though this would seem to imply that these programs are more selective and thus are attracting a particular type of prospective teacher, the researchers found no consistent relationship between school selectivity and teacher effectiveness.
There was also speculative evidence that specialization vis-à-vis student subgroups and regions exist, and that teacher prep programs change their focus over time. The researchers indicate that this means improvement in teacher prep programs is possible, since there is previous evidence of programmatic change.
To read the full study, please visit http://www.cedr.us/papers/working/CEDR%20WP%202011-2%20Teacher%20Training%20%289-26%29.pdf
