Resources

Resources by Type

Research Report

Blazar, D., Litke, E., Barmore, J., & Gogolen, C. (Working Paper). What Does It Mean to be Ranked a "High" or "Low" Value-Added Teacher? Observing Differences in Instructional Quality Across Districts.Abstract

Education agencies are evaluating teachers using student achievement data. However, very little is known about the comparability of test-based or "value-added" metrics across districts and the extent to which they capture variability in classroom practices. Drawing on data from four urban districts, we find that teachers are categorized differently when compared within versus across districts. In addition, analyses of scores from two observation instruments, as well qualitative viewing of lesson videos identify stark differences in instructional practices across districts among teachers who receive similar within-district value-added rankings. Exploratory analyses suggest that these patterns are not explained by observable background characteristics of teachers and that factors beyond labor market sorting likely play a key role. 

McGinn, D., Kelcey, B., Hill, H., & Chin, M. (Working Paper). Using Item Response Theory to Learn about Observational Instruments.Abstract

As many states are slated to soon use scores derived from classroom observation instruments in high-stakes decisions, developers must cultivate methods for improving the functioning of these instruments. We show how multidimensional, multilevel item response theory models can yield information critical for improving the performance of observational instruments.

Bacher-Hicks, A., Chin, M., Hill, H., & Staiger, D. (Working Paper). Explaining Teacher Effects on Achievement Using Measures from Multiple Research Traditions.Abstract

Researchers have identified many characteristics of teachers and teaching that contribute to student outcomes. However, most studies investigate only a small number of these characteristics, likely underestimating the overall contribution. In this paper, we use a set of 28 teacher-level predictors drawn from multiple research traditions to explain teacher-level variation in student outcomes. These predictors collectively explain 28% of teacher-level variability in state standardized math test scores and 40% in a predictor-aligned math test. In addition, each individual predictor explains only a small, relatively unique portion of the total teacher-level variability. This first finding highlights the importance of choosing predictors and outcomes that are well aligned, and the second suggests that the phenomena underlying teacher effects is multidimensional. 

Kelcey, B., McGinn, D., Hill, H. C., & Charalambous, C. (Working Paper). The Generalizability of Item Parameters Across Lessons.Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate three aspects of construct validity for the Mathematical Quality of Instruction classroom observation instrument: (1) the dimensionality of scores, (2) the generalizability of these scores across districts, and (3) the predictive validity of these scores in terms of student achievement.

Hill, H. C., Kraft, M. A., & Herlihy, C. (2016). Developing Common Core Classrooms Through Rubric-Based Coaching . Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard University.Abstract

The project team is still awaiting student test data to complete the evaluation, but this brief provides a short update on survey results. Students of MQI-coached teachers report that their teachers ask more substantive questions, and require more use of mathematical vocabulary as compared to students of control teachers. Students in MQI-coached classrooms also reported more student talk in class. Teachers who received MQI Coaching tended to find their professional development significantly more useful than control teachers, and were also more likely to report that their mathematics instruction improved over the course of the year.

Kane, T. J. (2016). Let the Numbers Have Their Say: Evidence on Massachusetts' Charter Schools . Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard University.Abstract

In Massachusetts, the charter school debate has centered on four concerns:

  • that the achievement of the high-scoring charter schools is due to selective admission and retention policies and not the education that the charter schools provide,
  • that charter schools are underserving English language learners and special education students,
  • that charter schools are disciplining students at higher rates in order to drive troublesome students back to traditional schools, and
  • that charter schools are undermining traditional public schools financially.

This report summarizes the evidence pertaining to these four concerns.

Hurwitz, M., Mbekeani, P. P., Nipson, M., & Page, L. C. (2016). Surprising Ripple Effects: How Changing the SAT Score-Sending Policy for Low-Income Students Impacts College Access and Success. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Publisher's VersionAbstract

Subtle policy adjustments can induce relatively large “ripple effects.” We evaluate a College Board initiative that increased the number of free SAT score reports available to low-income students and changed the time horizon for using these score reports. Using a difference-in-differences analytic strategy, we estimate that targeted students were roughly 10 percentage points more likely to send eight or more reports. The policy improved on-time college attendance and 6-year bachelor’s completion by about 2 percentage points. Impacts were realized primarily by students who were competitive candidates for 4-year college admission. The bachelor’s completion impacts are larger than would be expected based on the number of students driven by the policy change to enroll in college and to shift into more selective colleges. The unexplained portion of the completion effects may result from improvements in nonacademic fit between students and the postsecondary institutions in which they enroll.

  •  
  • 1 of 4
  • »

SDP Partner Diagnostic

Practitioner Resource

Technical Resource

Case Study

Newsletter

Presentation

Kane, T. J. (2016). Askwith Forum – Teaching Higher: Educators’ Perspectives on Common Core Implementation.Abstract

With the debate over the federal role in education at rest with the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), it is time to refocus attention on how to help the states move forward and succeed using the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). In this Askwith Forum, Professor Thomas Kane will share findings about CCSS implementation strategies from the Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard University. This will be followed by a panel of educators, who will share their experiences, pain points, and successes with the CCSS over this past year.

Learn more about Teaching Higher.

Hill, H. (2014). Lessons Learned from Instruction | Results from a Study of Upper-Elementary Mathematics Classrooms. Beyond the Numbers Convening.Abstract

While research has generated substantial information regarding the characteristics of effective mathematics teachers and classrooms, scholars have rarely tested multiple aspects of teachers or teaching within a single study. Without testing multiple variables simultaneously, it is difficult to identify specific aspects of mathematics teachers and teaching that may be particularly impactful on student learning, and to understand the degree to which these characteristics are related to one another. This plenary draws on data from a three-year study measuring multiple components of teacher and teaching quality to investigate these issues.

Resources By Focus Area

Teacher Effectiveness

Postsecondary Access & Success

School Improvement & Redesign