Let Local School Leaders Do Their Job

(Guest Post by James Shuls)

Traditionally trained teachers typically enter the profession after completing coursework that is designed to prepare them for the classroom. This training includes a student teaching experience—a hands-on opportunity to practice their craft. Alternatively certified teachers, on the other hand, often enter the classroom with little to no pedagogical training or classroom experience. So, how do alternatively certified teachers compare to traditionally trained teachers in terms of effectiveness? Many scholars have examined this question, but Julie Trivitt and I are the first to do so using Arkansas data. The results from our analysis of elementary and middle school teachers were recently published in Educational Policy. Like many others, we find the difference between the two groups to be negligible.

Here is a quick summary of the findings:

On average, alternatively certified teachers tend to perform slightly lower than traditionally certified teachers, but there is more variation within each group than between groups. Furthermore, the differences between groups tend to be small and marginally significant only when we control for prior academic achievement as measured by teacher licensure exams. Because alternatively certified teachers score significantly higher on licensure exams, on average, including these scores biases the estimates of alternative certification downward. Nevertheless, the coefficient on alternative certification remains negative, but insignificant, when teacher test scores are not included. We conclude that traditionally certified teachers gain some experience through their training program, which translates to close to a year of experience. Alternatively certified teachers seem to make up the difference as they gain from years of experience at a more rapid rate than traditionally certified teachers.

How could it be that teachers who have undergone training are no more effective than teachers who have not? One possible explanation is that the types of individuals who enter the classroom via the two routes are significantly different from one another; at least, that’s what we found. Alternatively certified teachers in our sample scored significantly higher on all sections of the Praxis I and on the Praxis II professional knowledge exams. The biggest difference between the groups was in math, where alternatively certified teachers scored roughly a half of a standard deviation higher than traditionally certified teachers.

Alternative routes to the classroom seem to be attracting individuals who have higher academic capabilities, on average, than the traditional route to the classroom. This finding is not unique to Arkansas. Tim Sass found that alternatively certified teachers in Florida scored significantly higher on the SAT (2011). In New York, a team of researchers found that alternatively certified teachers from more selective programs performed significantly better than traditionally trained teachers, “Only 5 percent of newly hired Teaching Fellows and TFA teachers in 2003 failed the Liberal Arts and Sciences Test (LAST) exam on their first attempt, while 16.2 percent of newly hired traditional teachers failed the LAST exam…”

So what does this say about traditional teacher training programs? Some might argue that they are of no use, but that is not exactly what the data say. What we see in the Arkansas data, and in the results from other states, is that colleges of education take individuals who have lower academic capabilities, on average, and make them equally effective as individuals who are more academically capable.

There is indeed value in teacher training programs, but there is also value in alternative routes to the classroom. Each route has its benefits and its drawbacks. That is why Julie and I conclude that “teachers, and students, would be best served by equipping schools with more authority to hire the individuals they believe are qualified for the job and to certify those individuals who meet the expectations in the classroom.” Expand routes to the classroom and let local school leaders do their job. Let’s let them decide which teacher is the right fit for their school.

————————————————-

James Shuls is the Director of Education Policy at the Show-Me Institute.  He earned his doctorate in education policy from the University of Arkansas’ Department of Education Reform.

Advertisements

11 Responses to Let Local School Leaders Do Their Job

  1. Matthew Ladner says:

    So why not dispose of Colleges of Education and simply create a minimum required score on the Praxis or some similar test equivalent to what the average score of the alternatively certified teachers?

  2. James Shuls says:

    Matt,
    I would have two problems with that approach. First, the Praxis is not a perfect measure of effectiveness. Therefore, a simple pass/fail would let some bad teachers in and keep some good teachers out. I think we should use the Praxis or other licensure exam scores as a continuous score for informational purposes. It should inform hiring decisions, not determine them.

    Secondly, there is no need to close Colleges of Education. They do add some value. However, they should not be required. Rather, let’s open the floodgates and let local school leaders use their judgement to hire teachers. Colleges of education can remain open, provided there is demand for their graduates.

    • The model might be like business school. You don’t need a business degree to work for a business, but you might want one if you (and the employer) think it conveys some useful skills.

    • Matthew Ladner says:

      I agree that exiting poor performers is the key and would be happy to allow students to decide whether the Colleges survive or not.

  3. Mike G. says:

    You write: “colleges of education take individuals who have lower academic capabilities, on average, and make them equally effective as individuals who are more academically capable.”

    Wait a sec. Help a slower learner like me.

    1. Is there evidence that colleges of education “make” anyone more capable? RCT or similar? I’m not aware of it. Would love to see it.

    2. Another hypothesis is there’s not much of a relationship between academically strong teachers and effective teachers. Maybe a tiny one in certain situations. Isn’t that what Hanushek, Rivkin, and Kane have argued over the years?

    If they’re right, then it’s not that teacher colleges “make anyone better.” It’s that more academically capable teachers (measured by SAT, GRE, or various exams) don’t seem to have much advantage in generating student growth.

    I may be wrong in my thinking here, if so, would love to learn where.

  4. Greg Forster says:

    I agree with the principal principle – let the principal hire and fire whoever and hold him accountable (through choice, of course). So in principle we don’t say “close the colleges” but rather “let the chips fall where they may.” But the reality is that in such an environment the colleges would be extremely unlikely to stay open because of the enormous time and tuition costs. How many low-scoring people would choose to carry the enormous burden of ed school knowing that at the end of the process they have to compete against a robust labor pool of high scorers?

    • Matthew Ladner says:

      It would be incumbent upon the Colleges to demonstrate to students and employers that they add enough value to justify their expense. I’m guessing that they might need to do better than “my scores may be low, but don’t worry I have a College of Ed degree to make up for it!”

      • Greg Forster says:

        But what we’re finding is that ed schools don’t add nearly that kind of value. I suppose it’s hypothetically possible they might react to the introduction of market forces with vigorous entrepreneurial reforms; if you think that’s a practical likelihood I have a bridge to sell you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s