The research is in. Expert teachers -- teachers who understand both the
subjects and the children they teach -- make the most important difference
in what students learn.
Well prepared, experienced teachers can overcome many of the academic obstacles
that today's students bring to schools with them -- poverty, broken homes,
language differences, and learning disabilities.
A lot of folks don't want to believe this is true. They've accepted the
all-too-common view that when kids from difficult beginnings fail in school,
their failure is always explained by forces outside the education system.
Blame the home. Blame the kid. But don't blame the school!
Yet a recent study of high- and low-achieving schools in New York City with
similar student populations found that 90% of the difference in student
reading and math test scores could be traced to teacher qualifications (defined
by teaching credential, master's degrees, and teaching experience).
Another large study in Texas found that a student's background explained
only half the difference among high- and low-achieving kids. Teacher qualifications
accounted for most of the rest.
I'm not here to criticize teachers. Long Beach Unified is lucky to have
so many dedicated and talented classroom professionals But given the diverse
and challenging backgrounds of many LBUSD students-and the district's expectation
that they will master ever higher academic standards-teachers will need
far greater knowledge and skill than ever before.
Can you be a good teacher and still have room to improve? Here's what Paul
Jenkins, chair of the history department at Rogers Middle School and a fifth-year
teacher, says: "On a good day, with a good lesson, I'm a good teacher.
And I think those days are becoming greater and greater in number. But I
think that for me personally, I still don't have my standards high enough
. . . . And I would say good teachers always feel that way."
So what is the school district doing to help teachers continue to improve?
A lot.
Over the last few years, Long Beach Unified has become increasingly focused
on what students are expected to know-and what teachers need to know to
help those students achieve at higher levels. Common sense, perhaps, but
few school districts across the nation explicitly connect their student
achievement standards to teachers' professional development.
Instead, most large school districts create Byzantine-like bureaucracies,
each with its own power base. In many districts, a different person is responsible
for curriculum and for professional development. To make matters worse,
a third person (usually in personnel) is often responsible for new teacher
training. A concerted effort to improve student and teacher learning is
just about impossible under these circumstances.
Superintendent Carl Cohn fixed this problem in Long Beach last year when
he appointed one of his most talented staff members-Chris Dominguez-as assistant
superintendent for curriculum, professional development, and new teacher
programs. Dominguez' job description is a clear sign that the school district
understands how important teacher quality will be in its campaign to raise
student achievement.
Investing in professional development
Just a few years ago, the district could not even say how much it spent
on teacher training. Its professional development offerings were a hodgepodge
of ill-defined learning experiences that frequently did not match the district's
educational goals, and were seldom designed around the needs of a specific
school or a specific group of teachers.
Today, the district is using student performance data, information about
teachers' educational backgrounds, and feedback from teachers and principals
to make most of its decisions about what to offer, to whom, and under what
conditions. In addition to the high-quality voluntary training programs
it offers, the district will now require that all middle school teachers
participate in sharply focused institutes to deepen their knowledge of the
subjects they teach and add to the toolbox of skills they need to teach
those subjects effectively to all kids.
Shaping professional development around district goals and the specific
strengths and weaknesses of teachers represents a cutting-edge development
in education, which, as a field, has been notorious for under-investing
in human resources.
And Long Beach Unified plans to move even further out on the edge by actually
evaluting its professional development programs to see if they make a difference
in the classroom. "We will be looking at changes in teacher practice
and student practice," says Dominguez, "... lay(ing) out the observable
behaviors principals should see in teachers as result of these institutes."
It's doubtful that even half-a-dozen large urban school systems in the United
States evaluate in-service training this way.
The soft underbelly of reform
The work of Chris Dominguez and her colleagues represents a sea change in
the way the district thinks about the connection between what teachers know
and how well students succeed. Long Beach Unified is making the large investments
in teacher development that it must make to raise student achievement substantially.
Major change often requires institutions to face up to problems once ignored.
Just a year ago, LBUSD was not paying enough attention to who teaches its
middle school students, even though the district had been pursuing more
rigorous academic standards in the middle grades for several years.
When the district looked more closely at its own data this year, it uncovered
some disturbing facts. Among all of the district's 6th grade science teachers,
for example, 19% are on emergency credentials and 61% are teaching science
without a "content credential"-the equivalent of a college major
or minor. In 8th grade math, 14% are on emergency credentials and 28% teach
without a content credential.
These facts can be explained to some extent-if not glossed over-by the high
demand for teachers in the wake of the California class-size initiative,
and by the (now fading) national practice of assigning middle school teachers
without much regard to their content background.
What can not be easily explained or excused is the way in which uncredentialed
and inexperienced teachers have been assigned to specific middle schools
in Long Beach Unified.
Guess which schools and kids are more likely to have underqualified teachers?
That's right: the schools that serve the district's poorest and most academically
disadvantaged students. This is the soft, vulnerable underbelly of LBUSD's
reform movement.
As the table on this page shows, of the ten middle schools serving the poorest
kids, nine also have the highest numbers of uncredentialed teachers. And
eight are among the schools with the most first-year teachers. We shouldn't
be too surprised that these same schools have the lowest percentages of
proficient math students.
Unfortunately, this practice of assigning the least knowledgeable and least
experienced teachers to students with the most need is America's dirty little
education secret. "This is the reality of urban education and is the
essence of the challenge we face," said Dorothy Harper, the area superintendent
in charge of Long Beach Prep, when we asked her about the school's staffing.
But this current reality does not have to be a fait accompli. Long Beach
Unified is building itself a national repuation as a bold innovator in standards
and professional development. How about an equally bold approach to the
problem of teacher assignments?
The district's current teacher transfer policy allows senior teachers to
avoid being placed in the most challenging schools-- and few volunteer.
Those who do volunteer burn out quickly in schools full of needy students
and needy young teachers.
Neither district leaders nor union officials have much enthusiasm for changing
the transfer policy. And sending teachers to high-need schools under a forced
labor policy isn't going to create the high-energy environment needed to
drive change. But there's still room for boldness and innovation.
The district could by begin paying better teachers more and providing them
better working conditions (e.g., smaller caseloads) for teaching the most
challenging students.
By overstaffing high-risk schools, the district could lower teacher-student
ratios-an incentive that most teachers hunger for.
A controversial idea
Edging closer to real controversy, can the district and its leadership find
the wherewithal to challenge the current egalitarian culture of teaching
where all teachers are considered the same and their work of similar worth?
Will the time come when the district has the courage to reward teachers
who take on the toughest jobs, work the hardest to sharpen their professional
skills, and make the most progress with their students, measured by a fair,
"value-added" accountability system?
These may be tough steps the district needs to take if standards-based middle
school reform is going to work. The district can be certain that reform
will not succeed-at least not for the kids at Franklin, Hamilton, Lindbergh,
Washington and other hard-pressed schools - unless each school has a critical
mass of experienced, expert teachers who can mentor their young colleagues
and take on the toughest assignments themselves.
Without this critical mass, the district's innovations in professional development
and support for new teachers will only serve as "triage" for the
most needy schools, where too many students are served by a revolving door
of noncredentialed and beginning teachers who try hard but don't have the
knowledge and skills to be successful.