Abstract
Recent research demonstrates that professional learning experiences and consistent evaluation and feedback systems significantly improve teachers’ instructional practices and students’ learning. This chapter examines the role of teacher evaluation and feedback systems in supporting instructional change with four other factors: professional development, collaboration, teacher beliefs about constructive pedagogy, and teacher–student relationships. Data came from lower secondary school mathematics teachers’ responses to the Teaching and Learning International Study (TALIS) 2013, and focuses on schools in Japan, Korea, Singapore, and the United States. Descriptive analyses illustrate how teacher evaluation and feedback vary across these countries, while regression analyses examine the degree to which teacher feedback is associated with mathematics instruction. In particular, the study explores factors that mediate the impact of teacher feedback on mathematics instruction. The results of this study provide comparative insights into how to use teacher evaluation and feedback systems effectively in improving mathematics instruction.
The first two authors contributed equally to this work.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
University graduates who complete teacher training courses are conferred the level 2 teacher certificate through a non-examination authorization procedure. Level 2 teachers who work for 3 years are entitled to obtain the level 1 teacher certificate by taking a required in-service training course.
References
Akiba, M., & LeTendre, G. K. (2009). Improving teacher quality: The U.S. teaching force in global context. New York: Teachers College Press.
Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Lee, D.-S. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. The Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51–73.
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3–32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ball, D. L., Hill, H. C., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide? American Educator, 29(1), 14–17 20–22, 43–46.
Baratz-Snowden, J. (2009). Fixing tenure: A proposal for assuring teacher effectiveness and due process. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1995). Expanding a teacher’s knowledge base: A cognitive psychological perspective on professional development. In T. R. Guskey & A. M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices (pp. 35–65). New York: Teachers College Press.
Borman, G., Gamoran, A., & Bowdon, J. (2008). A randomized trial of teacher development in elementary science: First-year achievement effects. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1, 237–264.
Buckley, J. (2009). Cross-national response styles in international educational assessments: Evidence from PISA 2006. Paper presented at the NCES Conference on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA): What We Can Learn from PISA, Washington, DC.
Chen, C., Lee, S.-Y., & Stevenson, H. W. (1995). Response style and cross-cultural comparisons of rating scales among East Asian and North American students. Psychological Science, 6(3), 170–175.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Teacher learning communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 24–32.
Cocoran, T. B., Shields, P. M., & Zucker, A. A. (1998). Evaluation of NSF’s Statewide System Initiatives (SSI) program: The SSIs and professional development for teachers. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Coggshall, J. G., Rasmussen, C., Colton, A., Milton, J., & Jacques, C. (2012). Generating teaching effectiveness: The role of job-embedded professional learning in teacher evaluation. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102(2), 294–343.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching. New York: National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future.
Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 597–604.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R. C., Richardson, N., Andree, A., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on professional development in the U.S. and abroad. Washington, DC: National Staff Development Council.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Youngs, P. (2002). Defining “highly qualified teachers”: What does “scientifically-based research” actually tell us? Educational Researcher, 31(9), 13–25.
Desimone, L. M., Porter, A. C., Garet, M. S., Yoon, K. S., & Birman, B. F. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 81–112.
Doherty, K. M., & Jacobs, S. (2013). State of the states 2013: Connect the dots: Using evaluations of teacher effectiveness to inform policy and practice. Washington, DC: National Council on Teacher Quality.
Garet, M. S., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ledwig, M., Jones, W., et al. (2008). The impact of two professional development interventions on early reading instruction and achievement. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.
Gersten, R., Chard, D., Jayanthi, M., Baker, S., Morphy, P., & Flojo, J. (2009). A meta-analysis of mathematics instructional interventions for students with learning disabilities: A technical report. Los Alamitos, CA: Instructional Research Group.
Gersten, R., & Clarke, B. S. (2007). Effective strategies for teaching students with difficulties in mathematics. NCTM: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2006). A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 109(4), 877–896.
Goe, L. (2007). The link between teacher quality and student outcomes: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Goe, L., Biggers, K., & Croft, A. (2012). Linking teacher evaluation to professional development: Focusing on improving teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Grigg, J., Kelly, K. A., Gamoran, A., & Borman, G. (2012). Effects of two scientific inquiry professional development interventions on teaching practice. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(1), 38–56.
Grouws, D. (2004). Mathematics. In G. Cawelti (Ed.), Handbook of research on improving student achievement (pp. 160–178). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
Hamilton, L. S., & Martínez, J. F. (2007). What can TIMSS surveys tell us about mathematics reforms in the United States during the 1990s. In T. Loveless (Ed.), Lessons learned: What international assessments tell us about math achievement (pp. 127–174). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Hill, H. C., Blunk, M. L., Charalambos, C. Y., Lewis, J. M., Phelps, G. C., Sleep, L., et al. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26(4), 1–81.
Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.
Hull, J. (2013). Trends in teacher evaluation: How states are measuring teacher performance. Alexandria, VA: Center for Public Education.
Isenberg, E., Glazerman, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Lugo-Gil, J., Grider, M., et al. (2009). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Results from the second year of a randomized controlled study (NCEE 2009-4072). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Kaur, B. (2010). Towards excellence in mathematics education—Singapore’s experience. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Science, 8, 28–34.
Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement. New York: Teachers College Press.
National Center for Education Statistics (2014). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2013: U.S. technical report. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2010). Strong performers and successful reformers in education: Lessons from PISA for the United States. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2011). Building a high-quality teaching profession: Lessons from around the world. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2014a). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2014b). TALIS 2013 technical report. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Dordrecht; Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Seo, K. (2012). Lessons from Korea. Educational Leadership, 70(3), 75–78.
Shimahara, N. K. (2002). Teaching in Japan: A cultural perspective. New York: Routledge Farmer.
Son, J. (2013). How preservice teachers interpret and respond to student errors: Ratio and proportion in similar rectangles. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 84(1), 49–70.
Stein, M. K., Grover, B., & Henningsen, M. A. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488.
Steward, V. (2012). A world-class education: Learning from international models of excellence and innovation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (2004). Improving mathematics teaching. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 12–16.
Supovitz, J. A., Mayer, D. P., & Kahle, J. B. (2000). Promoting inquiry-based instructional practice: The longitudinal impact of professional development in the context of systemic reform. Educational Policy, 14(3), 331–356.
Supovitz, J. A., Sirinides, P., & May, H. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 31–56.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics (2006). Teachers and educational quality: Monitoring global needs for 2015. Montreal, Quebec: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W.-Y., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. L. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.
Youngs, P. (2013). Using teacher evaluation reform and professional development to support Common Core assessments. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
Zurr, A. F., Ieno, E. N., & Elphick, C. S. (2010). A protocol of data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 1, 3–13.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Han, S.W., Son, JW., Kang, C. (2017). Examining the Association Between Teacher Feedback and Mathematics Instruction in Japan, Korea, Singapore, and the United States. In: Son, JW., Watanabe, T., Lo, JJ. (eds) What Matters? Research Trends in International Comparative Studies in Mathematics Education. Research in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51187-0_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51187-0_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-51185-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-51187-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)