New
Teacher Induction
Teacher Professional Development
Teacher Salaries and Working Conditions
Recent school reform initiatives have drawn increased attention
to the role of professional development and working conditions in
enhancing teacher quality and guaranteeing an adequate supply of
well-qualified teachers (NCTAF 1996,
1997, and 2003;
National Education Goals Panel 1995;
National Foundation for the Improvement
of Education 1996; and No Child Left
Behind Act 2001). The need for professional development has
become more urgent as the nation's schools prepare for increased
teacher retirements over the next decade (NCTAF
2003).
Research shows that teachers cite working conditions as among the
top reasons for leaving their teaching jobs (NCTAF
2003). Inadequate support from administrators, student discipline
problems, little faculty input into school decision making, inadequate
facilities and supplies, and low salaries all contribute to teacher
turnover (Ingersoll 2001, NCTAF
2003, and NCES 1997a). This
section examines teachers' professional development and working
conditions, based on the responses of a nationally representative
sample of teachers in the 19992000 Schools and Staffing Survey
(SASS), and has a special focus on public middle and high school
mathematics and science teachers.
New Teacher Induction
Induction programs typically have two goals: to improve the skills
of beginning teachers and to reduce attrition. The National
Commission on Teaching and America's Future (1996) contended
that school districts usually assign new teachers to classes (often
those with the most difficult students), and leave them to cope
on their own. These initial experiences can contribute to high turnover
rates among new teachers (NCES 1997a,
and NCTAF 2003). To ease new teachers'
entry into the profession, many school districts increasingly use
formal induction and mentoring programs to help them adjust to their
new responsibilities (AFT 2001).
Among public middle and high school mathematics teachers who entered
the profession between 1995 and 1999 (hereafter referred to as recently
hired teachers or new teachers), 61 percent participated
in an induction program in their first year of teaching (figure
1-21 ).
A similar proportion (66 percent) reported that they worked with
a master or mentor teacher, although fewer (52 percent) reported
working with another mathematics teacher as their mentor. Recently
hired science teachers had similar participation rates in induction
programs and mentorship activities, although even fewer new science
teachers (38 percent) reported being mentored by someone who teaches
in the same subject area.
Induction participation rates did not significantly differ between
new mathematics teachers in high- and low-poverty public high schools
(61 versus 56 percent), but were significantly lower for new science
teachers in high-poverty schools compared with their counterparts
in low-poverty schools (51 versus 70 percent) (appendix
table 1-14 ).
Participation in mentoring activities did not significantly differ
for new mathematics and science teachers in high- and low-poverty
schools.
In addition to induction and mentoring, new teachers also can benefit
from practice teaching before they enter the classroom. In academic
year 1999, a majority of new mathematics and science teachers in
public middle and high schools (89 and 83 percent, respectively)
performed practice teaching before entering teaching (figure
1-21 ).
For most of them (74 and 66 percent, respectively), practice teaching
lasted for 10 or more weeks (figure
1-21 ).
Participation in practice teaching was significantly related to
schools' poverty level and minority enrollment. In public high schools,
new mathematics and science teachers in high-poverty schools were
less likely than their counterparts in low-poverty schools to have
performed practice teaching for 10 weeks or more; in fact, they
were more likely to have not performed practice teaching at all
(appendix table
1-14 ).
Similar gaps in practice teaching experience also existed between
high- and low-minority schools.
A vast majority of new mathematics and science teachers in public
middle and high schools reported they felt well prepared to teach
mathematics or science in their first year of teaching (figure
1-22 ).
At least two-thirds felt well prepared to perform various teaching
activities such as planning lessons, assessing students, and using
a variety of teaching methods in their classes. At least half felt
well prepared in selecting or adapting curriculum and instructional
materials and in handling a range of classroom management and discipline
situations. About 41 percent of new mathematics teachers and 48
percent of new science teachers felt well prepared to use computers
for classroom instruction.
A positive relationship existed between participation in induction
and mentoring programs and new teachers' feelings of preparedness.
For example, new mathematics teachers who participated in an induction
program more often felt well prepared to use computers for classroom
instruction, and those who worked with a mentor teacher more often
felt well prepared to use a variety of instructional methods in
the classroom (appendix
table 1-15 ).
Participation in induction programs and mentoring activities had
an even more positive relationship to feelings of preparedness among
new science teachers than among new mathematics teachers. New science
teachers who had induction or mentoring experiences more often reported
feeling well prepared in planning lessons effectively, assessing
students, selecting or adapting curriculum and instructional materials,
and using a variety of teaching methods compared with their counterparts
who did not have such experiences.
Teacher Professional Development
The following analysis reviews the content of professional development
programs in which public middle and high school mathematics and
science teachers participated during the 12 months before the SASS
survey took place in academic year 1999.
Teacher Professional Development Program Content
Mathematics and science teachers exhibited a pattern of participation
in professional development programs similar to the pattern exhibited
by all other teachers. Teachers reported the use of computers for
instruction, methods of teaching, and content and performance standards
as the three top subjects for professional development in academic
year 1999. Between 66 and 73 percent of public middle and high school
mathematics and science teachers reported participating in professional
development programs on one of these three topics (figure
1-23 ).
Slightly more than half of mathematics and science teachers (56
and 54 percent, respectively) reported participating in programs
on student assessment. Participation in indepth study of content
in a teacher's main field ranked comparatively lower, reported by
53 percent of mathematics teachers and 47 percent of science teachers.
Teachers were least likely to have participated in programs on student
discipline and classroom management.
Both mathematics and science teachers rated use of technology for
instruction as one of their top interests for future professional
development (figure 1-24
).
They also gave high ratings to study in their main subject field.
Methods of teaching, teaching students with special needs, and student
assessment received the lowest ratings.
Teacher Professional Development Program Duration
One of the most important concerns about teacher professional development
is the duration of training. Richardson
(1990) notes that providing adequate time for professional development
programs is crucial to allow teachers to learn and absorb the information
supplied during their training. A recent study that used a nationally
representative sample of mathematics and science teachers to identify
characteristics of effective professional development supported
this statement (Garet et al. 2001).
Researchers generally agree that short-term professional development
activities are not as conducive to meaningful change in teaching
performance as more intensive activities (Little
1993).
Although the majority of mathematics and science teachers (68 and
71 percent, respectively) reported participation in professional
development programs on the use of computers for instruction (figure
1-23 ),
only about half of those participants reported attending such programs
for more than 8 hours, or the equivalent of 1 or more days (figure
1-25 ).
Mathematics and science teachers were most likely to spend more
than 1 day of professional training on the indepth study of their
main subject field or on content and performance standards. Between
42 and 52 percent of mathematics and science participants reported
spending more than 1 day of training on these two topics and an
additional 14 to 34 percent reported participating for about a week
or more. The topics on which teachers spent the least amount of
time in training were student assessment and discipline and classroom
management.
Perceived Usefulness of Professional Development
Available national surveys provide information about the prevalence
of professional development, topic coverage, and duration, but reveal
little about the structure and quality of these programs (Mayer,
Mullens, and Moore 2000). Using the 199394 SASS, Choy
and Chen (1998) found that most teachers had positive views
about the impact of their professional development programs. For
example, 85 percent of teachers who participated in professional
development programs thought these programs provided them with new
information, 65 percent agreed that these programs made them change
their teaching practices, and 62 percent agreed that the programs
motivated them to seek further information or training. Parsad,
Lewis, and Farris (2001) also found that most teachers (at least
89 percent) who participated in professional development programs
in various areas believed that these programs somewhat improved
their teaching. Teachers who participated in longer programs reported
this more often than those who participated only in shorter programs.
In academic year 1999, mathematics and science teachers who participated
in professional development programs on various topics for more
than 8 hours generally found them useful. In public middle and high
schools, approximately three-fourths of teachers who participated
in longer programs covering indepth study of their main subject
field or the use of computers for instruction found these programs
useful or very useful (appendix
table 1-16 ).
Approximately two-thirds of participants found programs on content
and performance standards, student assessment, student discipline
and classroom management, and methods of teaching useful. Teachers'
perceptions of the usefulness of various professional development
programs were related to their duration: teachers who participated
in training for 8 hours or more were more likely than those who
participated for from 1 to 8 hours to report that the training was
useful or very useful.
Teacher Salaries and Working Conditions
Although good working conditions can help attract and retain teachers,
salary also matters. In an effort to attract and retain high-quality
teachers, many states and school districts are attempting to raise
teacher salaries and improve working conditions (NCTAF
2003). The following analysis examines trends in teacher salaries
over recent decades, compares sal aries of U.S. teachers to those
of their counterparts in other nations, and looks at conditions
in which teachers work.
Trends in Teacher Salaries
Average salaries (in constant 2001 dollars) of all public K12
teachers decreased between 1970 and 1980 by about $700 annually
(Nelson, Drown, and Gould 2002)
(figure 1-26
).
Teacher salaries rose in the 1980s and continued to grow, albeit
slowly, during the 1990s. In academic year 2000, the average salary
for all public K12 teachers was $43,250. After adjusting for inflation,
this was about $1,000 more than the average salary of teachers in
academic year 1990.
The overall trend of salaries for beginning teachers resembled
the trend for all teachers. However, during recent years, beginning
teacher salaries have risen faster than the salaries of all teachers,
increasing more than 4 percent in academic years 1999 and 2000 compared
with 3.3 to 3.4 percent for all teachers (Nelson,
Drown, and Gould 2002). However, beginning teachers receive
substantially lower salaries than the average salary for new college
graduates in other occupations. In academic year 2000, the average
starting salary offer to college graduates in other occupations
was $42,712, whereas the average salary for beginning teachers was
just under $29,000 (Nelson, Drown,
and Gould 2002). Teacher salaries typically are 9-month based.
International Comparisons of Teacher Salaries
Compared with teachers in many other countries, U.S. teachers are
paid relatively well. In 2000, the annual statutory salaries of
lower and upper secondary teachers with 15 years of experience in
the United States were about $40,072 and $40,181, respectively,
compared with respective averages of $31,221 and $33,582 for teachers
in OECD countries (figure
1-27 ).
Nevertheless, teacher pay scales in the United States tend to be
lower than those in a number of other countries. For example, the
annual statutory salary of U.S. lower secondary teachers with 15
years of experience ($40,072) lagged behind those of Switzerland
(U.S. dollars $54,763), South Korea (U.S. dollars $43,800), and
Japan (U.S. dollars $42,820). Gaps were particularly wide at the
upper secondary (high school) level because some countries require
higher educational qualifications and thus pay teachers significantly
more at this level. For example, in 2000, the statutory salaries
for upper secondary teachers with 15 years of experience exceeded
$42,000 in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, South Korea, and Japan,
and exceeded $65,000 in Switzerland (OECD
2002). The comparable salary for the United States was about
$40,000.
Comparing statutory salaries relative to per capita gross domestic
product (GDP) is another way to assess the relative value of teacher
salaries across countries. A high salary relative to per capita
GDP suggests that a country invests more of its financial resources
in its teachers. Relative to per capita GDP, teacher salaries rank
lowest in the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Norway, and highest in
South Korea, Switzerland, and Spain (figure
1-27 ).
The United States had a below-average ratio of teacher salaries
relative to per capita GDP (1.12 compared with 1.35 for lower secondary
teachers, and 1.12 compared with 1.45 for upper secondary teachers).
These data indicate that the United States spent a below-average
share of its wealth on teacher salaries.
Variation in Average Salaries of U.S. Mathematics
and Science Teachers
The 19992000 SASS data indicate that the base salaries of public
middle and high school mathematics and science teachers averaged
between $39,000 and $40,000 in academic year 1999, a range similar
to that for all other teachers (figure
1-28 ).
Their average earnings, which included additional school-year compensation
(e.g., from coaching, sponsoring a student activity, or teaching
evening classes), summer school salaries, and any nonschool earnings,
totaled between $42,000 and $45,000 for mathematics and science
teachers, not significantly different from the average earnings
of between $43,000 and $45,000 for all other teachers.
Mathematics and science teachers in high-poverty public high schools
tended to earn less than their counterparts in low-poverty public
high schools, but the pattern differed in schools with high- and
low-minority enrollment (figure
1-29 ).
Mathematics teachers in high-minority schools earned more than their
counterparts in low-minority schools ($46,000 compared with $42,000),
and science teachers in high-minority schools earned about the same
as their counterparts in low-minority schools ($45,000 compared
with $43,000). These differences may partially reflect different
experience levels.
Mathematics and science teachers in high-poverty public high schools
were less likely than their counterparts in low-poverty schools
to feel satisfied with their salaries (figure
1-29 ).
Although teachers in high-minority schools earned more than (mathematics
teachers) or as much as (science teachers) their counterparts in
low-minority schools, they were less satisfied with their salaries.
Differences in cost of living and working conditions may help explain
this finding.
Other Aspects of Working Conditions
Other aspects of teachers' working conditions can affect teacher
recruitment and retention (Ingersoll
2001, NCES 1997a, and NCTAF
2003). The 19992000 SASS data indicate that, in many respects,
teachers found their working environments to be supportive. A majority
of public high school teachers agreed that their principal made
staff members aware of expectations (86 percent) and enforced school
rules (79 percent), they received support and encouragement from
their school administration (77 percent), their school district
made necessary materials available (75 percent), and staff members
worked together cooperatively (73 percent) (figure
1-30 ).
However, teachers in high-poverty and high-minority schools had
less favorable perceptions of their working conditions. They were
less likely to report that they received a great deal of parent
support, administrators provided support and enforced school rules,
colleagues worked together cooperatively, and school districts made
necessary teaching materials available (figure
1-30 ).
A majority of public high school teachers experienced some problems
in their schools that they identified as moderate or serious. These
problems included students coming to school unprepared to learn
(72 percent), student apathy (69 percent), absenteeism (65 percent),
tardiness (56 percent), disrespect for teachers (55 percent), and
truancy (39 percent) (appendix
table 1-17 ).
These problems were more likely to be reported in high-poverty and
high-minority schools.
|