Advertisement

Educational Research for Policy and Practice

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 177–192 | Cite as

Getting our best teachers into disadvantaged schools: differences in the professional and personal factors attracting more effective and less effective teachers to a school

  • Suzanne M. Rice
Article

Abstract

Of the school-level factors that have an impact on student learning, one of the most powerful appears to be the effectiveness of the individual teacher. The most effective teachers are, therefore, one of the most important tools schools and systems have at their disposal to lift the achievement of socio-economically disadvantaged students and improve equity, and policy must be designed in such a way as to draw more of them to the most disadvantaged educational settings. To do this, systems and schools need to be aware of differences in the priorities more and less effective teachers hold in deciding where to teach. This study highlighted such differences in a large sample of Australian teachers. The most effective teachers placed considerably more importance on professional factors in determining whether to transfer into a school. Implications for staffing policy are discussed.

Keywords

School staffing Teacher mobility Effective teachers 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allinder R. M. (1994) The relationship between efficacy and the instructional practices of special education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education and Special Education 17: 86–95Google Scholar
  2. Anderson R., Greene M., Loewen P. (1988) Relationships among teachers’ and students’ thinking skills, sense of efficacy, and student achievement. Alberta Journal of Educational Research 34(2): 148–165Google Scholar
  3. Ashton P. T., Webb R. B. (1986) Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. Longman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Boe, E. E., Barkanic, G., & Leow, C. (1999). Retention and attrition of teachers at the school level: National trends and predictions. Data analysis report no: 1999-DAR1. Washington, DC: National Institute on Educational Governance, Finance, Policymaking and Management.Google Scholar
  5. Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). Who leaves? Teacher attrition and student achievement. National Bureau for Economic research working paper no. 14022. http://www.nber.org/papers/w14022.
  6. Boyd D., Lankford H., Loeb S., Wyckoff J. (2004) The draw of home: How teachers’ preferences for proximity disadvantage urban schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 24(1): 113–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Campbell J., Kyriakides L., Muijs D., Robinson W. (2004) Assessing teacher effectiveness: Developing a differentiated model. Routledge-Falmer, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chidolue, M. E. (1996). The relationship between teacher characteristics, learning environment and student achievement and attitude. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 22(3), 263–274.Google Scholar
  9. Darling-Hammond L. (2000) Solving the dilemmas of teacher supply, demand and standards: How we can ensure a competent, caring and qualified teacher for every child. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Darling-Hammond L. (2004) Inequality and the right to learn: Access to qualified teachers in Californian public schools. Teachers College Record 106(10): 1936–1966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Department for Education and Schools (DfES). (2003). Department of Councillors Brief. http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/la/CF.POLICY_BRIEF_2003.pdf.
  12. Falch T., Strom B. (2005) Teacher turnover and non-pecuniary factors. Economics of Education Review 24(6): 611–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Georgiou S. G., Christou C., Stavrinides P., Panaoura G. (2002) Teacher attributions of student failure and teacher behavior toward the failing student. Psychology in the Schools 39(5): 583–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gibson S., Dembo M. (1984) Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology 76(4): 569–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glass, G. (1990). Using student test scores to evaluate teachers. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds). The new handbook of teacher evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teachers (pp. 229–239). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Goldhaber, D., Gross, B., & Player, D. (2007). Are public schools really losing their best? Assessing the career transitions of teachers and the implications for the quality of the teaching workforce. National Center for analysis of longitudinal data in educational research working paper number 12. http://www.caldercenter.org/PDF/1001115_Public_Schools.pdf.
  17. Hanushek E., Rivkin S. (2007) Pay, working conditions and teacher quality. The Future of Children 17(1): 69–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hanushek, E., Kain, J., & Rivkin, S. (1999). Do higher salaries buy better teachers? National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 7082. http://www.nber.org/papers/w7082.pdf.
  19. Hanushek, E., Kain, J., O’Brien, D., & Rivkin, S. (2005). The market for teacher quality. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 11154. http://www.nber.org/papers/w11154.
  20. Ingersoll, R. (2003). Who controls teachers’ work? Power and accountability in America’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. James R., Wyn J., Baldwin G., Hepworth G., McInnis C., Stephanou A. (2002) Rural and isolated school students and their higher education choices: A re-examination of student location, socioeconomic background, and educational advantage and disadvantage. National Board of Employment, Education and Training, Canberra, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  22. Kupermintz H. (2003) Teacher effects and teacher effectiveness: A validity investigation of the Tennessee Value Added Assessment System. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 25(3): 287–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lankford H., Loeb S., Wykoff J. (2002) Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11(3): 37–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leigh, A. (2007). Estimating teacher effectiveness from two-year changes in students’ test scores. Available at http://econrsss.anu.edu.au/~aleigh/pdf/TQPanel.pdf.
  25. Marzano P. (2003) What works in schools: Translating research into action. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VAGoogle Scholar
  26. Midgley C., Feldlaufer H., Eccles J. (1989) Change in teacher efficacy and student self-and task-related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to junior high school. Journal of Educational Psychology 81: 247–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ministerial Council on Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. (2003). Demand and Supply of Primary and Secondary School Teachers in Australia. Available at http://www.mceetya.edu.au/public/demand.htm.
  28. Muijs D. (2006) Measuring teacher effectiveness: Some methodological reflections. Educational Research and Evaluation 12(1): 53–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Muijs, D., Harris, A., Chapman, C., Stoll, L., & Russ, J. (2004). Improving schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas: A review of research evidence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15(2), 149–175.Google Scholar
  30. Murnane, R., Singer, J., Willett, J., Kemple, J., & Olsen, R. (1991). Who will teach? Policies that matter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Needels, M. C. (1991). Comparison of student, first-year, and experienced teachers’ interpretations of a first-grade lesson. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(3), 269–278.Google Scholar
  32. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2003). Beyond rhetoric: Adult learning policy and practices. Paris: Author.Google Scholar
  33. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: (2005) Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Author, ParisGoogle Scholar
  34. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2009). International adult literacy and basic skills surveys in the OECD region. Working Paper No. 26. Paris: Author. Available at http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/oeceduaab/26-en.htm.
  35. Palardy G., Rumberger R. (2008) Teacher effectiveness in the first grade: The importance of background qualifications, attitudes, and instructional practices for student learning. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 30(2): 111–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Patrick B., Hisley J., Kempler T. (2000) What’s everybody so excited about? The effects of teacher enthusiasm on student intrinsic motivation. Journal of Experimental Education 68(3): 217–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Peart N., Campbell F. (1999) At-risk students’ perceptions of teacher effectiveness. Journal for a Just and Caring Education 5(3): 269–284Google Scholar
  38. Rice, J. K. (2003). Teacher quality: Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington: Economic Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  39. Rivkin S., Hanushek E., Kain J. (2005) Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica 73(2): 417–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Scafidi B., Sjoquistb D., Stinebrickner T. (2007) Race, poverty, and teacher mobility. Economics of Education Review 26(2): 145–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smithers A., Robinson P. (2004) Teacher turnover, wastage and destinations. Centre for Education and Employment Research, University of Buckingham, Buckingham, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  42. Smithers, A., & Robinson, P. (2005). Teacher turnover, wastage and movements between schools. Buckingham, England: Centre for Education and Employment Research, University of Buckingham. DfES research report 640.Google Scholar
  43. Stotko E., Ingram R., Beatty-O’Ferrall M. (2007) Promising strategies for attracting and retaining effective urban teachers. Urban Education 42(1): 30–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stronge J. H. (2007) Qualities of effective teachers. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VAGoogle Scholar
  45. Teese, R. (2006). Condemned to innovate. Griffith Review, Autumn. http://www3.griffith.edu.au/01/griffithreview/past_editions.php?id=301.
  46. Teese, R. and Polesel, J. (2003). Undemocratic schooling: Equity and quality in mass secondary education in Australia. Carlton, Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Tye B., O’Brien L. (2002) Why are experienced teachers leaving the profession?. Phi Delta Kappan 84(1): 24–32Google Scholar
  48. Victorian Department of Education and Training (2004). Teacher supply and demand report 2004. Available at http://www.teaching.vic.gov.au/pdfs/Teacher%20Supply%20and%20Demand%20in%20Victoria%202004.pdf
  49. Victorian Institute of Teaching (2006). Annual Report 2005–2006. http://www.vit.vic.edu.au/files/documents/1061_VITAnnReportWeb.pdf.
  50. Vila, L. (2005). The outcomes of investment in education and people’s well-being. European Journal of Education, 40(1).Google Scholar
  51. Watson, A., & Hatton, N. (2002). School staffing: Linking quality with equality. Submission RTTE20 to the Australian Review of Teaching and Teacher Education. http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/1F0A28BE-C252-4FFD-AFC2-6D3C079677BA/1751/RTTE20.pdf.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations