Relationships between Observations of Elementary Mathematics Instruction and Student Achievement: Exploring Variability across Districts

Abstract

Much debate surrounding teacher quality has focused on students' standardized test scores, but recent federal and state initiatives have emphasized the use of multiple measures to evaluate teacher quality, including classroom observations. In this study, we explore differences across school districts in the relationship between student achievement outcomes and the observed quality of teachers' instruction. Using data from 298 elementary mathematics teachers in five urban US districts, we examine relationships between teachers' performance on the Mathematical Quality of Instruction observation instrument and their students' scores on both state standardized and researcher-developed tests. We find that these relationships differ across school districts. We explore the extent to which differences in skills and expectations for students across tests may explain this variability. An improved understanding of the relationship between classroom observations and student tests may help districts to better support teachers in developing their instructional effectiveness.

Teacher Characteristics and Student Learning in Mathematics: A Comprehensive Assessment

“…First, districts supplied student scores on state mathematics tests for the years of the study and for up to 2 years prior; many schools and teachers experienced these as high-stakes assessments due to No Child Left Behind regulations. These state tests ranged in content, from two that primarily focused on basic skills and problem-solving to one—used in two study districts—that required more complex thinking and communication about mathematics (Lynch, Chin & Blazer, 2017). Second, sampled students completed a project-developed mathematics test in the spring semester of each school year.…”

Resources for Teaching

“…Districts 1 and 2 come from the same state and utilize the same set of curriculum materials, Investigations , that was designed to support the mathematics reforms of the 1990s–2000s. Using an adapted version of the Surveys of Enacted Curriculum framework (Porter, 2002) to code state test items, Lynch, Chin, and Blazar (2015) found that the state assessment administered in both districts contained moderately cognitively challenging items and a higher level of academic difficulty than the other two state tests in the study. Interviews with district math coordinators suggest that District 1 had a decade-long and intensive effort to provide principals, teachers, and teacher leaders with professional development and coaching around ambitious instruction.…”

Effective teaching in elementary mathematics: Identifying classroom practices that support student achievement

“…It likely also is similar to new mathematics assessments administered under the Common Core (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, 2010). Lynch, Chin, and Blazar (2015) coded items from this assessment for format and cognitive demand using the Surveys of Enacted Curriculum framework (Porter, 2002). They found that the assessment often asked students to solve non-routine problems, including looking for patterns and explaining their reasoning.…”