Teacher Preparation Policies and Their Effects on Student Achievement

Abstract

State policies affect the qualifications of beginning teachers in numerous ways, including regulating entry requirements, providing incentives for graduate degrees, and subsidizing preparation programs at public universities. In this paper we assess how these policy choices affect student achievement, specifically comparing traditionally prepared with alternative-entry teachers; in-state traditionally prepared with out-of-state traditionally prepared teachers; teachers beginning with undergraduate degrees with those beginning with graduate degrees; and teachers prepared at in-state public universities with those prepared at in-state private universities. Using school fixed effects to analyze data from North Carolina, we find that: Teach For America corps members are more effective than traditionally prepared teachers; other alternative-entry teachers are less effective than traditionally prepared instructors in high school mathematics and science courses; and out-of-state traditionally prepared teachers are less effective than in-state traditionally prepared teachers, especially in elementary subjects where they constitute nearly 40 percent of the workforce.

Teaching for All? Teach For America's Effects Across the Distribution of Student Achievement

“…2 Across all but one of these studies (Noell & Gansle, 2009), TFA teachers outperformed novice teachers, and in some they also outperformed veteran teachers. TFA teachers also outperform new teachers from selective undergraduate teacher preparation programs and teachers from other selective alternative preparation programs, particularly in STEM subjects and secondary grades, but they left the classroom at higher rates than both alternatively and traditionally certified teachers (Boyd, Dunlop, et al, 2012; Boyd, Grossman, et al, 2012; Clark et al, 2013; Henry, Bastian, et al, 2014; Henry, Purtell, et al, 2014). Recent evidence also suggests that there are no spillover effects of TFA on student learning into non-TFA classrooms (Hansen, Backes, Brady, & Xu, 2014).…”

Supplying Disadvantaged Schools with Effective Teachers: Experimental Evidence on Secondary Math Teachers from Teach For America

“…()—0.04 effect size; and smaller than that found by Henry et al. ()—0.14 effect size. In high schools, our estimate of a 0.13 standard deviation impact is slightly smaller than that found by Henry et al.…”

“…Henry et al. () employ similar nonexperimental methods and find that TFA teachers in North Carolina have positive effects relative to traditionally certified teachers in math (within elementary, middle, and high school grades) and English‐language arts (in elementary and high school grades). Using data from high schools in North Carolina, Xu, Hannaway, and Taylor () exploit within‐student, cross‐subject variation in the certification route of students’ teachers and find that TFA teachers raise student achievement relative to non‐TFA teachers, especially achievement in science.…”

Incorporating Access to More Effective Teachers into Assessments of Educational Resource Equity

“…In this analysis alternative entry refers to teachers who entered the profession prior to completing requirements for initial licensure. Prior work in North Carolina indicates that these alternative entry instructors are significantly less effective than in-state traditionally prepared teachers in high school (Henry et al 2014). We do not include Teach For America corps members in this category.…”

“…2010; Henry, Bastian, and Fortner 2011;Henry et al 2014). While estimates (risk ratios) can be interpreted as probabilities, to further ease interpretation we also present percentages of tested-subject teachers at GHS and all other Wayne County high schools with the respective credentials.…”