|
Policy Framework
It is important that children who are learning to read be exposed to high-quality, research-based curricula, but it is also essential that teachers be well versed in the instructional practices that promote early literacy (see the description of Reading First for more on this topic). Many educators and researchers agree on two core elements of effective professional development for early-grade reading teachers. First, professional development efforts should provide teachers with a core understanding of language content and structure and of how children learn to read. Second, they should give teachers ample opportunity to practice new strategies and to reflect on what they are learning.
It is less clear which models of professional development work best. For this reason, the U.S. Department of Education has commissioned a random assignment study to provide rigorous evidence on the effects on reading instruction and student achievement of two alternative models of professional development. The study is being conducted by MDRC and the American Institutes for Research (AIR), along with Sopris West, CORE, and REDA International.
Agenda, Scope, and Goals
The study centers on second-grade teachers who are already using one of two widely adopted reading programs, Open Court Reading or Houghton Mifflin’s Legacy of Literacy/Nations’ Choice. The 90 schools participating in the study were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a "business-as-usual" control group (with teachers at these schools receiving only the professional development services normally delivered by the district) or one of two program groups receiving alternative models of professional development. In Model 1, teachers participated in a 40-hour summer institute and in three day-long seminars during the following school year. In Model 2, teachers participated in the same activities as in Model 1 but also received intensive coaching (approximately three hours of coaching per teacher per week). Both treatment models focused on the content of early reading and incorporated features of high-quality professional development.
The study addresses six research questions:
- What effects do summer institutes with scientifically based content and modest follow-up during the school year (Model 1) have on teacher knowledge, instructional practices, and student reading achievement? What is the incremental effect of adding in-school coaching to these services (Model 2)?
- To what extent are the effects of the two treatment models on student reading achievement mediated by the models’ effects on teacher knowledge and instructional practice?
- To what extent do the effects of the two treatment models depend on the reading program being implemented in the district, the characteristics of students being served by the schools, or the prior knowledge or other characteristics of teachers?
- How do the effects of the two treatment models change over time? Do the effects of the models on teacher knowledge and instruction grow, stabilize, or fade over the course of the study period?
- To what extent do the effects of the two treatment models vary according to the amount of professional development received by the teachers at each school?
- What are the per-teacher costs of participating in the two treatment models?
The project began with a year-long pilot phase during the 2004-2005 school year. The goal of the pilot phase was to implement a professional development program in two schools in each of two districts, to learn about their implementation experiences, and to ascertain how teachers apply what they learn in their classrooms.
Design, Sites, and Data Sources
The full study involves a total of a 90 schools in six districts. Baltimore County; Dayton, Ohio; and Prince George's County, Maryland are using Houghton Mifflin’s Nation’s Choice/Legacy of Literacy. The three Open Court Reading districts are Baltimore City, Maryland; Indianapolis, Indiana; and Detroit, Michigan.
During the study’s first full implementation year, data were collected on the nature and costs of the professional development interventions; the district, school, and classroom contexts of second-grade reading instruction; and initial evidence of the impact of the interventions on participating teachers and their students. The last year of full implementation will involve a second wave of data collection on teachers’ professional development experiences and classroom conditions and on teacher and student outcomes
The project is tracking three main outcomes: teacher knowledge through surveys, teacher practice through classroom observations, and student achievement through data maintained by the districts. Other data collection efforts include observations of professional development sessions, surveys of school principals, and administration of a protocol to ascertain program costs.
The three-way random assignment design makes it possible to compare the outcomes of Model 1 with those of the usual professional development approach and to compare the outcomes of Model 2 with those of Model 1.
What's Next
AIR and MDRC will write two substantive reports. The first, to be published in the first half of 2008, will document the design of the project and the results of the analyses conducted on the data collected during the 2004-2005 school year. The final report will include the results for the entire project.
|
|
