Few would argue that advanced teacher training
does not make a difference in student achievement. In fact,
Professor William Sanders of the University of Tennessee argues
persuasively that "the single most dominant factor affecting
student academic gain is teacher effect." However, little statistical
research is available for evaluating which type of training and
teaching degree has the best effect on student achievement. As the
demand for higher academic achievement and accountability in public
education grows, it is important to determine whether teachers who
hold advanced degrees in education as a general field are more
effective than those who have degrees in specific subjects like
English or math.
Currently, to teach elementary (K-8)
education, most public school teachers must have a bachelor's
degree and related teaching credentials or certification. College
students who want to become teachers usually fulfill this
requirement in one of two ways: They obtain a degree in a
traditional academic discipline such as English, mathematics,
geography, or history; or they seek a general degree in education
or education management.
Because the relative effectiveness of the
education degree versus a subject degree is a topic of much
conjecture but little empirical research, this report has attempted
to fill the gap by studying the test scores of fourth and eighth
grade students who took the 1998 National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP) reading test and the 1996 NAEP math test. This
analysis compared students who were taught by teachers holding
advanced degrees in education with those whose teachers did not.
The data showed that:
-
In reading, eighth grade students of
teachers who hold advanced degrees in the field of education
perform worse on the NAEP exam than those whose teachers have
advanced degrees in English.
-
In math, eighth grade students of teachers
who hold advanced degrees in education perform worse on the NAEP
exam than those whose teachers hold any degree in math or science
(bachelor's or advanced degrees).
-
Among fourth grade students, there is no
significant difference in achievement between those whose teachers
hold a bachelor's degree in reading or math and those whose
teachers have advanced degrees in education.
-
A teacher's education may be less
important for achievement than the parents' education. This
research indicates that both math and reading scores rise if at
least one parent holds a bachelor's or postgraduate degree.
-
Teachers with subject degrees, rather than
education degrees, have students who perform better in math and
reading, especially as students age.
BACKGROUND
Most
Americans base their support for education spending on the belief
that better teachers and teaching practices lead to enhanced
student achievement. The debate over teacher
quality usually focuses on coursework at the colleges and
universities that train today's professional teachers. As critics
of America's public school system note, "U.S. schools aren't
producing satisfactory results, and this problem is not likely to
be solved until U.S. classrooms are filled with excellent
teachers." And although enclaves of
good teachers can be found in districts all across the nation, they
are not necessarily the norm.
Those who seek to understand this issue
should ask: Does a teacher's choice of undergraduate or graduate
major affect his or her students' academic performance? Is teacher
education the most important element of student achievement?
Academic and professional literature in the education field
dispenses much rhetoric on this subject, yet hard data on the
effects of teacher education are limited, at best.
Public elementary schoolteachers are
required to have a bachelor's degree, additional postgraduate work
related to educational practices, and--to teach in nearly 80
percent of the states--student teaching experience. Although
the postgraduate work is often administered through a university's
school of education, the initial degree can be obtained in a major
other than general education, such as math or science.
Some
critics argue that education classes can better prepare the
individual teacher for the classroom, but others contend that many
of these general education and pedagogy classes are so
ideologically driven that they expose future teachers to theorems
that may not be well grounded in empirical research.
For
example, in Better Teachers, Better Schools, Thomas B.
Fordham Foundation president Chester E. Finn, Jr., notes that
"Every additional requirement for prospective teachers--every
additional pedagogical course, every new hoop or hurdle--will have
a predictable and inexorable effect: it will limit the potential
supply of teachers by narrowing the pipeline while having no
bearing whatever on the quality or effectiveness of those in the
pipeline." One critic of this assessment claimed the analysis in
Better Teachers was based on "pseudo research, rumor, and
innuendo that virtually ignore historical and demographic facts
and/or rely on extraordinarily suspect methods of data collection
and analysis." Such outbursts, whether
well-founded or not, demand that more solid data analysis be
conducted to assess the effectiveness of teachers in the classroom.
Their education, experience, and long-term development should be
compared with the academic success of their students (as measured
by standardized test scores) to see if a trend toward greater
achievement exists.
Some
argue that as the general population becomes better educated, so
will teachers, and because the average number of years of education
have increased substantially, a master's degree should be
more desirable. It is true that a larger proportion of Americans
over the age of 25 now hold college degrees: In 1910, only about
2.5 percent of Americans graduated from college; by 1998, that
number had grown to nearly 25 percent. Moreover, an increasing
proportion of elementary and secondary schoolteachers, because of
job market demands, remuneration, and other factors, hold master's
degrees. For example, in the 1993-1994 school year, over 42 percent
of teachers reported having a master's or doctorate degree.
Yet,
how this increased education translates into improved student
performance and higher academic achievement is not clear. The
analysis here of students' scores in math and reading on the
National Assessment of Educational Progress exams sheds some light
on this concern.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NAEP DATA
To
analyze the influence of teacher education on student achievement,
this analysis considered the results of the 1996 and 1998 National
Assessment of Educational Progress tests for fourth and eighth
grade students in math and reading, respectively.
The
NAEP, first administered in 1969, measures academic achievement in
a variety of fields, including reading, writing, mathematics,
science, geography, civics, and the arts. Currently, the NAEP is
administered to fourth, eighth, and twelfth grade students, and the
tests for math and reading are given alternately every two years.
In 1998, for example, students took the NAEP reading test; math was
assessed in 1996 and 2000.
The
NAEP actually involves two tests: a national test and
state-administered tests. About 40 states participate in the
separate state samples that are used to gauge achievement within
individual jurisdictions. For the purposes of this study, the 1996
and 1998 national data were used.
The
most significant benefit of using the NAEP data is that, in
addition to test scores in a subject area, the assessment asks an
assortment of background questions of the students taking the exam,
their main subject-area teacher, and their school administrator.
Responses from the teachers and school administrators are linked to
the student's information, which yields a rich database of
information. These questions concern:
By
incorporating these variables in assessments of the NAEP results,
researchers can better understand the factors that explain
differences in test results among children.
THE HERITAGE ANALYSIS
This
analysis considers the effects of teacher education on academic
achievement by analyzing six factors:
-
Teacher education by highest degree
attained and undergraduate/graduate major;
-
Race and ethnicity of the student;
-
Parents' educational attainment;
-
Number of reading materials in the
home;
-
Free or reduced-price lunch participation;
and
-
Gender.
|
How to Interpret
These Findings
This report contains the results of
statistical analyses of student's National Assessment of
Educational Progress scores in reading and math. These statistical
tests isolate the independent effects of a number of factors on
test scores in order to determine the effect of advanced teaching
degrees alone. Because the statistical model includes socioeconomic
characteristics and factors such as parents' education and number
of reading materials available at home, it controls for the effect
of each variable on the test scores. Thus, the findings about
teacher education and NAEP scores apply as much to upper-income as
to lower-income students, to blacks as to whites, to girls as to
boys, and so forth, because the model isolates the effect of
each.
However, even though there is a
statistical relationship between each factor and student
achievement, these independent factors do not necessarily cause
differences in academic achievement. The model does not include
everything that might have an effect on academic achievement, such
as the methods used to teach reading or math. Thus, some variables
also may be measuring the effect of an unobservable factor. For
example, this model does not suggest that children from poor
families will do worse on the NAEP because they are poor. Rather,
poor families may have some unobservable characteristics or
challenges that make it more difficult for their children to
succeed in school. Similarly, controls for race may measure
characteristics correlated with race that make it more difficult
for students to score well on the tests.
Moreover, some variables, such as
participation in the federal Free and Reduced-Price Lunch program,
are proxies for other unobserved factors. Eligibility for this
federal program, for example, is determined by income; only
children from low-income families may participate. Although not all
low-income children will participate in it, many will. Such
information may be used to analyze the effect of different
characteristics on achievement.
Finally, a finding of "statistically
insignificant" indicates that the effect of the variable/factor is
no different than zero. For example, if the relationship between
teacher education and academic achievement is statistically
insignificant, students who have teachers with subject degrees do
no better than students who have teachers with education
degrees.
|
The
effect of each of these factors on test scores can be isolated
using a regression analysis. The Heritage model employs a
jackknifed ordinary least squares model and examines the effects of
each factor on the NAEP 1996 math and 1998 reading tests'
nationwide sample of public school children.
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
-
Teacher Education. The effect of teacher
education can only be adequately assessed if the teacher's
undergraduate or graduate major and the highest degree achieved are
both considered. The combination of these two factors will yield
six teacher education scenarios:
-
Bachelor's degree in education;
-
Advanced degree in education (the base
case in the analysis);
-
Bachelor's degree in subject
(English/literature for the reading exam, math/science for the math
exam);
-
Advanced degree in subject;
-
Bachelor's degree in other subject; or
-
Advanced degree in other subject.
The base case scenario for this analysis
is a student taught by a teacher who has an advanced degree in
education. Gains and losses in NAEP scores are relative to the base
case (see below).
-
Race and Ethnicity. Many studies
and reports have shown that, over time, students from predominantly
African-American and Hispanic communities tend to perform more
poorly on standardized tests than do students from predominantly
white communities (although the gap generally has narrowed over the
past 25 years). There are a number of
possible socioeconomic explanations for this trend, among which are
poverty, peer pressure that discourages academic achievement, and
crime.
Because strong differences in academic achievement exist among
races, variables of race and ethnicity are included in the
analysis.
-
Parents' Education. Many
researchers have noted that the educational attainment of a child's
parents is a good predictor of that child's academic achievement.
Parents who, for instance, are college educated may be better
equipped to help their children with homework and understanding
concepts than are those who have less than a high school education,
other things being equal. Because the education level of one parent
is often highly correlated with that of the other, only a single
variable is included in the analysis.
-
Number of Reading Materials in the
Home. The presence of books, magazines, an encyclopedia, and
newspapers generally indicates a dedication to learning.
Researchers have determined that these reading materials are
important aspects of the home environment. This analysis includes a
variable controlling for the number of these four types of reading
materials in the home.
-
Free/Reduced-Price Lunch
Participation. Income can be a key predictor of academic
achievement because low-income families seldom have the financial
resources to purchase extra study materials or tutorial classes to
help their children perform better in school. Although the NAEP
does not collect data on household income, it does collect data on
participation in the federal Free and Reduced-Price Lunch program,
which are used here.
-
Gender. Research indicates that
girls tend to perform better on reading and writing tests, while
boys perform better in the more analytical subjects of math and
science.
Many authors have expounded on this idea, yet the data on the
male-female achievement gaps can often lead researchers to
inconsistent observations. For example, in 1998, young men scored
higher than young women on both the verbal and quantitative
sections of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). Some writers
suggest that this may be due to a fundamental bias against females
in America's educational system. Another explanation,
however, is that the test results reflect a selection bias in which
more "at-risk" females opt to take the SAT relative to males. In order
to account for this difference, the analysis includes a variable
for gender.
-
Omitted variables. Previous
Heritage research on education-related issues
included additional family background variables in the model
specification. In the 1998 NAEP database, the only information
available on children's parents is educational attainment. The NAEP
does not ask whether the child lives with both parents (or parental
figures), one parent, or no parents (in a group home). Future
administrations of the NAEP test should include this type of
question since a great deal of research is finding that having both
parents in the home can improve a child's academic achievement.
RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS
For
this analysis, the six variables listed above were entered into a
statistical model, which was then applied to
the NAEP's 1996 and 1998 nationwide sample of public school
children who took the reading and math tests, respectively. Chart 1
and Chart 2 show the percent change in fourth and eighth grade
reading scores attributable to these factors, compared with the
base case; Chart 3 and Chart 4 report the percent change in math
scores.
Here, the base case is defined as a child
with the following characteristics:
-
White;
-
Female;
-
Non-poor (that is, not participating in
the Free and Reduced-Price Lunch program);
-
Has parents who did not attend
college;
-
Has two out of the four possible reading
materials in the home; and
-
Was taught by a teacher with an advanced
degree in education.
Table 1 reports the average, or
hypothetical, base case scores on the reading and math NAEP fourth
and eighth grade tests. If the student were black, Hispanic, male,
or poor, her score would drop, on average; if her home had more
than two reading materials or her parents had taken college-level
courses, her score would increase.
The
analysis found that fourth grade students of teachers who have any
degrees in English or math do not score higher on the reading or
math exam (respectively) than fourth graders taught by teachers
with advanced degrees in education. (See Chart 1 for the fourth
grade reading scores and Chart 3 for the fourth grade math
results). This is not surprising,
considering the type of coursework children are taught in the lower
grades. Since the material is less rigorous in the early grades as
children learn basic to intermediate concepts, teachers may not
realize much additional value by obtaining another degree in a
subject. By the eighth grade, though, measurable differences
appear; an advanced degree in the subject improves student
achievement significantly more than an advanced degree in
education.
It
should be noted that, on average, teachers with advanced degrees in
either education or a traditional subject will have students who
perform better on standardized tests.
Compared with the students of teachers who
hold advanced degrees in education, the eighth grade students of
teachers who possess advanced degrees in English or literature
scored 2.7 percent higher on the reading NAEP exam (see Chart 2).
Teachers who had just a bachelor's degree in education had eighth
grade students who scored statistically the same as their peers who
had teachers holding an advanced degree in education.
There are even more noteworthy results in
math (see Chart 4). Eighth grade students taught by a teacher who
has a bachelor's degree in math or science scored 2.2 percent
higher than their peers who were taught by a teacher who holds an
advanced degree in education. That percentage increases to 3.4
percent if the teacher holds an advanced degree in math or science.
These results demonstrate that teachers who are more qualified in a
subject transmit the more advanced concepts in junior high school
math better (on average). This result suggests that eighth grade
teachers with the most basic math subject education have students
who do better than those taught by the best educated teachers with
degrees from university-level departments of education.
At
the same time, variables such as race, income, home environment,
and parents' attainment of college degrees are all significant
factors in explaining differences in reading test scores.
Both
fourth and eighth grade girls score slightly higher than boys on
the NAEP reading exam, and statistically the same as boys on the
NAEP math test. These facts bolster recent evidence on gender
differences in academic achievement. As American Enterprise
Institute W. H. Brady Fellow Christina Hoff Sommers notes, girls on
average "get better grades, are more engaged academically, and are
now the majority sex in higher education." The results here support
the contention that schools are not shortchanging girls, contrary
to some recent claims.
CONCLUSION
Public elementary school administrators
have an interest in hiring the best teachers for their schools,
especially since Americans increasingly demand results and
accountability for public education spending. As the findings of
this analysis indicate, hiring teachers who hold subject degrees in
math or English, rather than education degrees, is more likely to
result in higher math or reading achievement among older (eighth
grade) students.
Kirk A. Johnson,
Ph.D., is a Policy Analyst in The Center for Data Analysis at
The Heritage Foundation.
APPENDIX
ANALYZING THE RESULTS
OF THE STATISTICAL MODEL
The
results of the fourth and eighth grade models for 1998 NAEP reading
data and 1996 NAEP math data, respectively, are shown in Table 2
and Table 3. The data show that the teacher education variable is
statistically significant for eighth grade students only.
In
this analysis, two statistical issues must be considered. First,
the NAEP exam is a long test, and it is therefore not administered
in its entirety to all children. Rather, different parts are given
to different children. Certain students will do better on certain
portions of the test than others. Consequently, a "true" score must
be estimated, or imputed, from the incomplete information. NAEP
estimates five plausible composite reading scores and recommends
that researchers use all five in any analysis. The Heritage model
here follows the guidelines specified by the Educational Testing
Service (which works closely with the National Center for Education
Statistics in developing the file) to incorporate all five reading
scores into the analysis.
Second, the NAEP utilizes a complex sample
design, which oversamples children with certain characteristics. Each child
is assigned a unique weight calculated from the probability of
being selected out of the population at large (in this case, from
the U.S. population of fourth or eighth graders in public schools).
The NAEP sample design requires a complex modeling technique, which
the Heritage model has employed.
William L. Sanders and
June C. Rivers, "Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on
Future Student Academic Achievement," Research Progress
Report, University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and
Assessment Center, Knoxville, Tennessee, November 1996, p. i.