Teaching Inequality

This report from Ed Trust (available at http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/rdonlyres/010DBD9F-CED8-4D2B-9E0D-91B446746ED3/0/TQReportJune2006.pdf) highlights the shameful truth that:

Poor and minority children don’t underachieve in school just because they often enter behind; but, also because the schools that are supposed to serve them actually shortchange them in the one resource they most need to reach their potential – high-quality teachers. Research has shown that when it comes to the distribution of the best teachers, poor and minority students do not get their fair share.

This excellent report is consistent with every other study I've seen -- I've posted at www.tilsonfunds.com/Personal/TeacherQuality.pdf some slides from a study in Illinois that measures teacher quality in a much more robust way (see the five criteria at the bottom of the first slide), but reaches the same conclusion (see the charts on pages 2 and 3, which show that in the 10% of schools with the highest percentage of minority and low-income students, SIXTY PERCENT of the teachers are in the bottom ten percent of the Teacher Quality Index!).  What a total disgrace! 

 

And what really drives me nuts is when people look at the horrific underperformance of low-income, minority kids and conclude that it's their fault (or the fault of their parents or communities) -- effectively blaming the victims of the dreadful teachers and schools our society has provided to them.

 

Every study I've seen shows that teacher quality SWAMPS every other factor -- in other words, as KIPP and others have shown, if you take the poorest minority kids, from the most violent neighborhoods, with broken families in which the parent(s) never finished high school, and provide them with great teachers in a sound learning environment (good discipline, high expectations, etc.), these kids WILL ACHIEVE!  Look at slides 5 and 6 of the attached to see what happened to two identical groups of kids over three years, when one group had three consecutive very effective teachers (top 25%) vs. three consecutive very ineffective teachers (bottom 25%).

 

This should not be surprising -- I still remember the best teachers I ever had, and the amount I learned under them was exponentially more than what I learned from average teachers.

-----------------------

Next month, for the first time, leaders in every state must deliver to the Secretary of Education their plans for ensuring that low-income and minority students in their states are not taught disproportionately by inexperienced, out-of-field, or uncertified teachers.

For many, this process will be the first step in helping the citizens of their states to understand a fundamental, but painful truth: Poor and minority children don’t underachieve in school just because they often enter behind; but, also because the schools that are supposed to serve them actually shortchange them in the one resource they most need to reach their potential – high-quality teachers. Research has shown that when it comes to the distribution of the best teachers, poor and minority students do not get their fair share.

 

Two years ago, with support from the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, three states—Ohio, Illinois and Wisconsin—and their three biggest school systems—Cleveland, Chicago and Milwaukee—set out with the Education Trust to tackle this very problem. Together, teams of stakeholders in each jurisdiction collected data on teacher distribution and identified patterns. In every case, they found large differences between the qualifications of teachers in the highest-poverty and highest-minority schools and teachers serving in schools with few minority and low-income students. The teams then analyzed the information to determine possible reasons for the patterns, and came up with strategies to achieve a fairer distribution.

 

The Distribution of Teacher Quality in the U.S.

Every year, a large number of children enter school substantially behind. Sometimes that’s because of poverty. Sometimes it’s because they speak a language other than English. Sometimes there are other issues. But regardless of the reason, many children – especially low-income and minority children – are entering the classroom without the knowledge and skills they need to succeed.

 

Unfortunately, rather than organizing our educational system to pair these children with our most expert teachers, who can help “catch them up” with their more advantaged peers, we actually do just the opposite. The very children who most need strong teachers are assigned, on average, to teachers with less experience, less education, and less skill than those who teach other children.

 

Certainly, there are fine, dedicated teachers who have devoted their lives to low-income and minority children, but they are the exception. Overall, the patterns are unequivocal. Regardless of how teacher quality is measured, poor and minority children get fewer than their fair share of high-quality teachers.

 

For example, despite clear evidence that brand-new teachers are not as effective as they will eventually become, students in high-poverty and high-minority schools are disproportionately assigned to teachers who are new to the profession. Children in the highest-poverty schools are assigned to novice teachers almost twice as often as children in low-poverty schools. Similarly, students in high-minority schools are assigned to novice teachers at twice the rate as students in schools without many minority students. Students in high-poverty and high-minority schools also are shortchanged when it comes to getting teachers with a strong background in the subjects they are teaching. Classes in high-poverty and high-minority secondary schools are more likely to be taught by “out-of-field teachers” – those without a major or minor in the subject they teach.

 

In high-poverty secondary schools, more than one in three core academic classes are taught by out-of-field teachers, compared to about one in five classes in low-poverty schools. When it comes to minority students, the same pattern persists. In secondary schools serving the most minority students, almost one in three classes are assigned to an out-of-field teacher compared to about one in five in low-minority schools. Importantly, these are teachers without a college major or minor – by most accounts, a low-bar in terms of demonstrating knowledge of content.