1 / 19

Learning (about) policy: Lessons for policy practitioners

Learning (about) policy: Lessons for policy practitioners. Archived Information. Heather Hill University of Michigan hhill@umich.edu. Good news from a researcher (for a change). Policy can change practice, improve teacher knowledge, and even improve student performance

kimama
Download Presentation

Learning (about) policy: Lessons for policy practitioners

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Learning (about) policy: Lessons for policy practitioners ArchivedInformation Heather Hill University of Michigan hhill@umich.edu

  2. Good news from a researcher (for a change) • Policy can change practice, improve teacher knowledge, and even improve student performance • But only under certain conditions • Policy not as efficient as possible • But we may improve efficiency

  3. Mathematics education policy: Two elementary school examples • California Mathematics Frameworks (1980s & 1990s)* • California Mathematics Professional Development Institutes, 2000-2002** *Sponsored by NSF REC# *Sponsored by NSF REC# 0207649

  4. Case #1: Learning policy: When state education reform works David K. Cohen Heather C. Hill

  5. The policy • 1985 and 1992 California Frameworks calling for more ambitious mathematics instruction • Policy instruments • Documents / frameworks • Curriculum materials – “replacement units” • Professional development • CLAS – policy-aligned assessment

  6. The study • Survey of 595 K-5 teachers, 1993-94 • Survey asked about: • Classroom mathematics practices • Professional development experiences • Curriculum use (especially replacement units) • Experience with state assessment

  7. The analytic questions • What were teachers doing? • What led to teachers “doing” policy? • What was the effect on student achievement?

  8. Findings: Learning Policy • Teachers balanced their practice • Teachers who reported more policy-aligned practice: • Were using “replacement units” • Had attended professional development around those replacement units • Had used the state assessment as an opportunity to assess their own teaching and students’ learning

  9. Findings: Learning Policy • Teachers reporting more conventional practice: • Had gone to “special topics” workshops • Were using conventional mathematics texts • Did not report using the assessment as an opportunity to revise their classroom practices • May or may not have read official policy documents

  10. Effect on student achievement • Student achievement on CLAS higher in schools where teachers learned about and used replacement units • Student achievement on CLAS higher in schools where teachers reported learning from test

  11. Case #2: Mathematics Professional Development Institutes (MPDIs)

  12. The policy • MPDIs part of broader policy designed to improve content knowledge in reading and mathematics via professional development • Cost: $40 million • Multiple sites governed by University of California Office of the President

  13. At elementary mathematics sites • Instructors: Mathematicians and mathematics educators • Focus was squarely on mathematics content • 40-120 hours of professional development during summer + follow-up

  14. Hill-Ball study • At K-6 Elementary Number and Operations sites • Designed measures of teachers’ knowledge for teaching elementary mathematics • Pre/post assessment, summer 2001 data

  15. MPDI teacher growth • For all institutes for which we have data, teachers gained roughly one-half standard deviation • Translates to 2-3 item increase on assessment • Considered substantial gain

  16. Results from sample sites

  17. Improving teacher knowledge • Length of institute predicts teacher gains • 120-hour institutes most effective, on average • But some 40-hour institutes very effective • Focus on mathematical analysis, proof, and communication leads to higher gains

  18. Cross-case conclusions • Policy can change practice, improve teacher knowledge, and even improve student performance • Policy itself has little traction • Instruments of policy do have traction • But only if they are sites for learning • Effort is large, effect sizes small

  19. Cross-case conclusions • Policy is not as “efficient” as possible • e.g., MPDI sites where teachers did not learn • But we can improve efficiency • Carefully design professional development itself • Grounded in classroom practice, such as curriculum materials, video/lesson study, study of the mathematics teachers use; long • Carefully design system of professional development • Assure coherence of system • Curriculum materials, in particular • Support continued, rigorous research

More Related