1. What are the contributions in "Conceptualising and evaluating teacher quality: substantive and methodological issues" ?
Following brief introductory comments related to current contexts, the paper focuses on two approaches towards the resolution current deficiencies – both of which have important implications for conceptualising and evaluating teacher quality, namely: ( a ) capacity building in teacher professionalism grounded in evidence-based pre-service teacher education content and subsequent in-service professional development, and ( b ) the specification and evaluation of teaching standards.. The paper concludes by arguing that since the most valuable resources available to any school are its teachers, there is a crucial need for both a substantive and methodological refocus of the prevailing economic teacher-quality/student-performance/merit-pay research and policy agenda to one that focuses on the need for capacity building in teacher professionalism ( and its evaluation ) in terms of teaching standards related to what teachers should know and be able to do.. The global economic, technological and social changes under way, requiring responses from an increasingly skilled workforce, make high quality educational provision an imperative – 1 Correspondence related to this paper should be directed to: Dr Lawrence Ingvarson, Principal Research Fellow, ACER, Private Bag 55, Camberwell, VIC 3124 ( Email: ingvarson @ acer.. Rather than focussing on the economics of teacher quality, per se ( as presented by other contributors to this conference ), the present paper stresses the need for policies and processes designed to improve teacher quality through building teacher capacity, including the need for valid methods of specifying and evaluating teacher quality, as well as teaching standards.. While such policies and processes have universal applicability, this paper focuses on the urgent need for the adoption of these policies and procedures throughout Australian education systems.. The major argument of this paper is that the authors will find it difficult to place greater value on teaching in substantive ways, such as better salaries and career paths for accomplished teachers, unless they greatly improve the capacity of the profession to define, evaluate and certify high quality teaching.. This paper focuses mainly on policy strategies related to improving teacher quality through building capacity ( rather than composition ), though it is recognised that these two strategies overlap.. The 2006 edition of the OECD ’ s report, Education at a Glance ( OECD, 2006 ), indicates that whereas the average ratio of the salary at the top of the incremental scale is 1. 70, it is only 1. 47 in Australia, and nearly 3 in Korea and Japan.. The Economics of Teacher Quality conference, ANU: 5 February 2007 Conceptualising & Evaluating 4 Ingvarson & Rowe Teacher Quality _____________________________________________________________________________________ of attaining high standards of performance.. Indeed, the salary scale provides few incentives for continued development of expertise in teaching.. A survey of public opinion about teacher quality in the USA found that all groups recognised the importance of teacher quality and strongly support reforms that lead to significant increases in teacher salaries, if those reforms also provide better guarantees that these increases reward evidence of professional development and quality teaching ( Hart & Teeter, 2002 ).. A review of research in this area by the Australian Council for Educational Research ( ACER ), commissioned by the Australian Government Department of Education, Science and Training ( DEST ), indicates that the reason for so many failed merit pay schemes over the past thirty years has been the lack of understanding about the complexity of developing valid and professionally credible methods for gathering data about teaching and assessing teacher performance ( Ingvarson, Kleinhenz & Wilkinson, forthcoming ).. A major reason for this is that the profession has yet to develop a voluntary system for providing certification to teachers who attain high standards of performance, at least one that employing authorities find credible and useful ( Ingvarson & Kleinhenz, 2006a, b ).. Without valid measures of teacher quality, the authors can not conduct research on the contribution that variation in teacher quality might make to Australia ’ s comparatively high levels of variation in student learning outcomes in schools for students drawn from high to low socioeconomic status backgrounds, as revealed in recent international studies of student achievement such as Australia ’ s participation in the OECD Programme for International Student Achievement ( PISA ), and in the IEA Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study ( TIMSS ).. A recent ACER study conducted for Teaching Australia ( Ingvarson, Elliott et al., 2006 ) examined current procedures for the assessment and accreditation of teacher education courses.. This study includes the development of survey instruments that include measures of mathematical and pedagogical knowledge, which may enhance their capacity to measure the outcomes of teacher education course outcomes.. The Victorian Institute of Teaching has introduced new standards-based assessment procedures for provisional registration, which means that registration for teachers in Victorian schools now depends on successful completion of a period of provisional registration supported by a mentor.. By the end of this period, graduate teachers are expected to provide evidence that their practice has met standards of performance established by the VIT before gaining full entry to the profession.. The focus of this paper is on 6 For specific details related to the PISA 2000 and 2003 results relevant to Australia, see: Lokan, Greenwood and Cresswell ( 2001 ) ; Rowe ( 2006b ) ; Thomson, Cresswell and De Bortoli ( 2004 ).. Comparative findings from fitting explanatory multivariate and multilevel models to both the PISA and TIMSS student achievement data across Australia ’ s six States and two Territories have been reported by Rowe ( 2006b ).. They provide the answers to the following questions: ‘ Who gets the right to train teachers ? ’. This paper is based on the proposition that, to carry out these functions more effectively, the authors need to develop more rigorous methods of assessing teacher quality.. The remainder of this paper focuses on methods for evaluating teacher quality for the purposes of developing a profession-wide system for identifying and recognising highly accomplished teachers.. The guiding questions for this section of the paper are: ‘ How do the authors develop valid indicators of teacher quality for purposes such as those above ? ’ and ‘ How do they decide what teachers should know and be able to do ? ’. Millman and DarlingHammond ( 1990 ) provide one of the most comprehensive reviews of this research in their New Handbook of Research on Teacher Evaluation.. Based on the work of Michael Scriven ( e. g. Scriven, 1994 ), Wheeler ( 1994 ) provides a helpful classification of foundations or sources that have been used in the US for developing criteria for evaluating teachers, together with comments on their relative validity.. The Appendix to this paper provides an elaboration of each of these sources.. This ratio seems unlikely to improve unless further salary increments are linked to evidence of enhanced teacher knowledge and skill.. While progression to the top of the salary ladder is rapid in Australia – it takes only 9 years for most Australian teachers to reach the top of the scale compared with 24 years on average in OECD countries – there are no further career stages based on evidence of attaining higher levels of teaching standards.. The authors suggest that the profession needs clearer guidelines as to what it expects its members to get better at with experience.. ( Further details can be found at: http: //teds. educ. msu. edu/default. asp ).. With some rare exceptions, there is little recent or current evidence to suggest that these mechanisms are operating effectively in Australia.
read more
2. What is the main implication of this discussion for the measurement of teaching quality?
The major implication of this discussion for the measurement of teaching quality is that measures of quality should focus on the quality of the opportunities for learning that teachers are providing for their students.
read more
3. What is the only example of a certification system for accomplished teachers?
The NBPTS is the only example of a certification system for accomplished teachers to have made a serious attempt to ensure the psychometric quality of its standards setting processes.
read more
4. What is the appropriate basis for evaluating teachers?
They argue that, for employer purposes, such as performance management and decisions about retaining employment, the appropriate basis for evaluation of teachers is the last item, namely, what teachers should be doing, based on the duties and responsibilities of a teacher as should be delineated in an employment contract.
read more
