Overview Research Team Center History Related Organizations

Center History: Related Analyses to Core Study

District Investment in Teaching Improvement: A Comparative Survey

Principal Investigators

Michael Knapp, University of Washington
Joan Talbert, Stanford University

Overview

Building on qualitative, longitudinal case studies in CTP's Core Study, this survey investigation quantitatively analyzed district efforts to enact coherent strategies for improving teaching and engendering strong learning communities. The study surveyed teachers and administrators within the Core Study districts and a comparison district in three of the four states engaged in proactive attempts to improve the quality of teaching (New York, North Carolina, California, and Washington). In these settings the surveys captured how district (and state) teaching policies were perceived, received, and implemented by school administrators and teachers. Survey analysis assessed equity and coherence within the district policy system, as well as overall differences among districts in response to policy strategies and effects on teaching quality. Survey instruments included items used in state and national surveys so that district cases could be located in relation to population norms. This research was sponsored by a grant from the Spencer Foundation.

Back to Core Study

Analysis of Long-Term State Investments in Teacher Quality

Principal Investigators

Linda Darling-Hammond, Stanford University
Barnett Berry, Southeast Center for Teaching Quality (SECTQ)

Overview

The purpose of this project was to assess teacher policy infrastructures and outcomes in states that in recent years pursued a teacher quality agenda. The project drew on analyses of the status of teaching reports developed by the state partners of the National Commission on Teaching & Americas Future (NCTAF) as well as on more in-depth studies of two state cases where substantial systemic work was done to overhaul teacher education and licensing, induction, and professional development. The two states were: North Carolina, with a focus on state investments in teacher development; and Connecticut, with a focus on state school finance, licensing, and induction reforms that enhance equity and promote teacher development.

Publications

Hint! Click on a title to see more information about it. Click on that title again to hide the information.

Connecticut's Story: A Model of State Teaching Policy
Policy Brief 4, June 2001.
PDF Original Study
A Case of Successful Teaching Policy: Connecticut's Long-Term Efforts to Improve Teaching and Learning
A Research Report by Suzanne M. Wilson, Linda Darling-Hammond, and Barnett Berry, February 2001.
Description:
This Research Report describes 15-years' worth of successful effort by Connecticut to implement a comprehensive set of teaching quality policies to support improved student learning. The authors hypothesize that the power of Connecticut's teaching policy reform lies not simply in their comprehensiveness and in the state's political stability over the last decade but also in the power of policies to build capacity in teachers, students, administrators, teacher educators and state department staff. A Policy Brief based on this report is also available.
Abstract:
In this monograph, the authors describe Connecticut's long-term efforts to implement a comprehensive set of teaching quality policies to support improved student learning. The authors begin by describing the 15-year evolution of policies designed to recruit, prepare, and support teachers, while also creating greater accountability for the acquisition of knowledge and skills on the part of both students and teachers. That description is followed by a summary of the large concomitant gains in student achievement in both mathematics and literacy and an evaluation of competing explanations for these gains. The authors conclude by hypothesizing that the power of Connecticut's teaching policy reforms lies not simply in their comprehensiveness and in the state's political stability over the last decade but also in the power of the policies to build capacity in all participants: teachers, students, administrators, teacher educators, and state department staff alike.
PDF Brief Abstract Original Study
Related Article: Wilson, Suzanne; Darling-Hammond, Linda; Berry, Barnett (2001). Steady work: The story of Connecticut's school reform. American Educator, (Fall 2001), 34-39 & 48.

Back to Core Study

Analysis of State Initiatives to Improve the Quality of Teaching

Principal Investigators

Eric Hirsch, National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL)
Julia Koppich, Koppich & Associates
Michael Knapp, University of Washington

Overview

This analysis updated a CTP Working Paper done two years earlier entitled What States Are Doing to Improve the Quality of Teaching, which drew on the NCSL's state tracking system and other sources (e.g., The Education Week Quality Counts series). The earlier piece, by the same authors offered descriptive patterns of activity across all 50 states in five realms of improvement effort: (1) promoting visions of good teaching and learning; (2) attracting, rewarding, and retaining capable people in teaching; (3) improving the initial preparation and induction of teachers; (4) motivating and supporting teachers' ongoing professional learning; and (5) enhancing the school workplace environment.

Publications

Hint! Click on a title to see more information about it. Click on that title again to hide the information.

Revisiting What States Are Doing to Improve the Quality of Teaching: An Update on Patterns and Trends
A Working Paper by Eric Hirsch, Julia E. Koppich, and Michael S. Knapp, February 2001.
Description:
This updated version of an earlier CTP Working Paper takes a fresh look at recent developments in the realms of state policy related to teacher and teaching quality. The broad-brush, descriptive analysis covers state-level policy action pertaining to (1) development and promotion of high standards for student learning and for teaching; (2) attempts to attract, reward, and retain capable people in the teaching profession; (3) support for high-quality initial preparation and induction of new teachers; (4) attempts to motivate and support teachers' ongoing professional learning; and (5) enhancements to the school workplace environment.
Abstract:
This updated version of the 1998 CTP Working Paper What States Are Doing to Improve the Quality of Teaching takes a fresh look at recent developments in realms of state policy related to teacher and teaching quality. Paying closest attention to recent legislative activity, the analysis describes state-level policy action pertaining to: (1) development and promotion of high standards for student learning and for teaching; (2) attempts to attract, reward, and retain capable people in the teaching profession; (3) support for high-quality initial preparation and induction of new teachers; (4) attempts to motivate and support teachers' ongoing professional learning; and (5) enhancements to the school workplace environment. The results indicate that states have been particularly active with respect to the development of teacher standards and assessments, approaches to a growing recruitment challenge, more proactive ways to improve teacher preparation (and hold teacher education institutions accountable), and some targeted efforts to strengthen professional development. While the paper is descriptive, not evaluative, the authors call in their concluding remarks for more coherent, data-informed policy related to the quality of teachers and teaching, yet acknowledge the difficulty of bringing this about at the state level.
PDF Abstract Original Study
State Action to Improve Teaching
Policy Brief 1, December 1999.
PDF Original Study

Back to Core Study

Analysis of Literacy Standards in Four States

Principal Investigators

Sheila Valencia, University of Washington
Elizabeth Dutro, University of Colorado

Overview

This research drew on analyses of four states and districts that explored the relation between state and local standards, specifically, how state-level reading standards are translated into district curricula. Considerable attention, time, and resources are spent constructing state Language Arts content standards, yet little is known about how, or if, these state standards influence local curricula, teaching practice, or student learning. And, in states and districts where accountability pressure is high, state assessments rather than standards, may receive the bulk of district-level attention.

Publications

Hint! Click on a title to see more information about it. Click on that title again to hide the information.

The Relation Between State and District Literacy Standards: Issues of Alignment, Influence, and Utility
A Research Report by Elizabeth Dutro and Sheila W. Valencia, January 2004.
Description:
This Research Report explores how state content standards in reading affect local content standards. The study, undertaken in four states, shows that under the guise of "alignment" between state and local standards, there is considerable variability, and that the usefulness of the state's efforts to promote local standards-based reform in this areas of the curriculum depends on various attributes of the state policy, the characteristic relationship between state and local level, and local engagement in professional development.
Abstract:
At the core of standards-based reform are content standards�statements about what students should know and be able to do. Although it is state standards that are the focus of much public attention and consume substantial resources, many local school districts have developed their own content standards in the major subject areas. However, we know very little about the role state standards have played in local standards efforts. In this article we report on a study of the relationship between state and local content standards in reading in four states and districts. Through interviews with key personnel in each state and district and analyses of state and local content standards in reading, we explored the alignment between state and district content standards, the path of influence between the two, and the role of high-stakes tests in state and districts reform efforts. Our findings suggest that alignment had multiple meanings and that state standards had differential utility to districts, ranging from helpful to benign to nuisance. This wide variability was influenced by the nature of the standards themselves, the state vision of alignment and local control, districts' own engagement and commitment to professional development, and student performance on high-stakes tests. We explore implications for the future of content standards as the cornerstone of standards-based reform and argue that states must promote district ownership and expand accountability if state content standards are to have any relevance for local efforts to reform teaching and learning.
PDF Abstract Original Study

Back to Core Study