Teacher Quality
Research shows that good teaching matters, but considerable debate continues over which policies and practices will help promote high-quality teaching.
In general, the preponderance of evidence concludes that effective teachers are capable of inspiring significantly greater learning gains in their students when compared with their weaker colleagues. Most of this evidence is based on “value added” analyses of large sets of data linking individual studentsrsquo; test scores to their teachers.
Such studies determine students average annual rates of improvement, as measured by test scores. They estimate how much value a teacher has contributed to student achievement, factoring in the gains the student was expected to make based on past performance, and in some cases, controlling for elements such as peer characteristics and background, including poverty level and family education.
Factors such as family background continue to predict a majority of the variation in student achievement, but scholars generally agree that teacher quality is probably the most important school-based factor affecting achievement. Specific estimates are difficult to arrive at because economists have been unable to link a portion of the variation in student achievement to any particular input (Sawchuk, 2011).
Back in 1998, several economists estimated that at least 7.5 percent of the variation in student achievement resulted directly from teacher quality and noted that the actual number could be as high as 20 percent (Hanushek, et al, 1998). A 1999 paper, meanwhile, puts all in-school factors, including school, teacher, and class level, at approximately 21 percent of the variation in 10th grade mathematics achievement. It further estimated that 8.5 percent was directly the result of teacher effectiveness (Goldhaber, et al, 1999).
Even so, the specific characteristics that constitute an effective teacher are hotly debated, in large part because teacher quality is extremely difficult to measure. As a result, most studies resort to measurable proxies, such as certification, academic degrees, and years of experience. Most of these characteristics bear some relationship to student scores, but on the whole, they explain only a fraction of teacher quality—perhaps as little as 3 percent of the overall variation in studentsrsquo; test scores (Rivkin, et al, 2005; Goldhaber, et al, 1999).
Of the measurable characteristics isolated for study, teaching experience has consistently been linked to student scores. On average, beginning teachers produce smaller learning gains in their students compared with more seasoned teachers. Most of the studies show that teachers grow in effectiveness over at least the first five years on the job, though the benefits of experience are less clear after that point (Nye, et al, 2004; Clotfelter, et al, March 2007, October 2007; Harris and Sass 2007).
Deep content-area knowledge is also an attribute of teachers that seems to have a positive impact on student achievement. This appears especially true for mathematics teachers. A variety of studies have found that factors such as math-licensure test scores, math certification, a math undergraduate or graduate degree, and math-focused professional development for secondary educators bear a relationship to student scores (Hill, et al, 2005; Harris and Sass, 2007; Goldhaber and Brewer 1999; Clotfelter, et al, March 2007, October 2007).
In general, most teacher-quality issues, including preparation, certification, tenure, evaluation, and licensing, continue to be the provenance of states and districts. The first major federal foray into teacher-quality standards came with the passage of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The law requires every teacher of a core academic subject defined in the law to be “highly qualified.”
To meet that designation, a teacher must be certified and have demonstrated proficiency in his or her subject matter by having majored in the subject in college, passing a subject-knowledge test, obtaining advanced certification in the subject, or using an alternate, state-determined method. The highly-qualified teacher rules have generally been criticized for having few effects overall on teacher practices (Keller, 2007).
At the time of this writing, education policy was beginning to undergo a sizeable shift in thinking about teacher quality. Through federal competitions, such as the $4.35 million Race to the Top program, and state legislation, policies have increasingly shifted away from investing in credentials and other “input”-based measures, toward policies designed to build teachersrsquo; skill levels through observations linked to teaching standards.
Teacher evaluations, the thinking goes, can serve as a method of both identifying high- and low-performing teachers and making professional development more useful by identifying the specific areas in which teaches need help.
Early evidence suggests that teacher observations can lead to improvements in teaching quality, as measured by studentsrsquo; scores. Observations, and especially conversations that result from them, can help teachers hone their craft and have been integrated as a key component of many school reform efforts. And building the professional capacity of educators was cited as one of five tenets that characterized school improvement in a 2010 report by the Consortium for Chicago School Research (Sawchuk, April 26, 2011; April 1, 2009; CCSR, 2010).
States that won grants in the Race to the Top competition pledged to make improvements to teacher evaluation and use the results to make decisions about teacher professional development, promotion, tenure, and compensation. Winning states are still in the beginning phases of doing so, and few exta
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
教师素质
研究表明，良好的教学事宜与在相关政策和教学行为方面的争论，都将有助于提高教学的质量。
在一般情况下，优势证据得出结论认为，高效的教师与他们较弱势的同事相比，能够显著激发出学生更大的学习效率。在分析这方面的证据最重要的是来自大量学生成绩提高的数据。
这些研究确定了学生每年进步的幅度，就像按考试成绩来衡量。他们评估老师对学生取得的成绩做出了多少贡献，有望使学生基于过去的表现，在某些情况下，如同行的特点和背景，包括贫困程度和家庭教育的元素控制做出了贡献。
如家庭背景等因素继续被认为会影响多数学生成绩的变化，但学者普遍认为，教师的素质可能是最重要的影响学生成绩的校本因素。具体的估计是很难到达的，因为经济学家已经无法获得任何特定输入的部分学生成绩的变化。（Sawchuk，2011年）
早在1998年，一些经济学家估计，至少有7.5％的学生成绩的变化直接由教师素质导致，并指出，实际数字可能高达20％（Hanushek等，1998）。同时，从1999年，所有学校的因素，包括学校，教师和班级的层次与水平，导致约21％的10年级学生的数学成绩的变化。它还估计，8.5％是直接由教师教学效率导致的结果。（Goldhaber等，1999年）
即便如此，一个有效率的教师的具体特点仍是激烈争论的焦点，在很大程度上是由于教师的素质是非常难以衡量的。因此，大多数研究诉诸衡量的理论，如资格认证，教师的学历和多年的教学经验等。这些特征大多关系到学生的成绩，但就整体而言，他们解释只有小部分教师的素质可能影响低至3％的学生的考试成绩整体变化（Rivkin等，2005年； Goldhaber等，1999年）。
研究分离的可测量特性表明，教师的教学经验一直被认为与学生的分数有关。平均而言，青年教师相比更多的经验丰富的老教师对学生产生的学习收益比较小。大多数研究表明，教师至少拥有5年工作的经验可以变得高效，但经验的具体好处是不太清楚的（Nye等人，2004年后； Clotfelter，等2007年3月2007年10月2007年Harris和Sass）。
知识深度也是一个教师素质的属性，似乎对一个学生的成绩能产生积极的影响。尤其是数学教师。各种研究已经发现，批准的的数学考试成绩，数学认证，数学本科或研究生学位，数学重点中学教师专业发展等因素，导致了与学生的分数之间的关系（Hill等，2005年; Harris 和 Sass，2007年； Goldhaber和Brewer,1999年； Clotfelter，等2007年3月2007年10月）。
在一般情况下，大多数教师的素质包含的内容比较多，其中包括了课前准备工作，教师资格认证，职称与任期，对教学的评价，以及国家和地区的出处。在2001年联邦通过了涉及到教师素质标准的法案，这是第一次重大改革，能保障儿童在学习上不会落后，法律要求每一个核心学科的任课教师必须是“高素质”的。
为了达到这一目标，每个教师必须经过认证，并且证明自身具备的教育教学能力，并在大学进行本专业学习时，需要通过学科知识测验，最终获得有效的教师资格认证，或使用各州确定的其他备用方法得到认证。高素质的教师培养规则对教师整体的教学行为已经产生了一些影响，（Keller，2007年）。
在写这篇文章时，教育政策已经开始在思考对教师素质方面进行相当大的改革。通过联邦的竞争赛事，如有435万美元激励的顶级项目，以及国家的强制立法，政策越来越多地转向远离投资凭证和其他“输入”的基础措施，而建立起能提高教师技能水平、教学水准的政策。
教师的评价、思想，可以作为区分表现优劣的教师的方法，确定了教师需要帮助的具体领域，可以让教师专业发展方向更加明确。
早期的证据表明，教师的意见，可能会导致教学质量的改进，如根据学生的成绩来衡量。意见，特别是谈话，可以帮助教师磨练自己的教学技巧，并已成为许多学校改革努力的关键组成部分。在2010年，教师的意见和建设教育工作者的专业能力，被芝加哥学派研究协会评为能改善学校特点的五个原则之一。（Sawchuk，2011年4月26日，2009年4月1日起，CCSR，2010年）
国赛的顶级赛事承诺用赢得的奖款为教育做出改善，促进教师评价发展，使教师专业素养得到发展，并进行推广。胜出的国家仍然在这样做法的开始阶段，一些现存的例子目前依然存在。（Sawchuk，2009年12月16日）。
在写这篇文章时其中最有争议的问题是，测试成绩的使用性能的几项措施之一，它已被一些教师协会和一些研究者批评，但受到了一些其他人的支持。（经济政策研究所，2010年；Brookings学会，2010年）
--教育周刊
出版日期：2004年8月4日，更新时间：2011年7月8日
Teacher Quality
Research shows that good teaching matters, but considerable debate continues over which policies and practices will help promote high-quality teaching.
In general, the preponderance of evidence concludes that effective teachers are capable of inspiring significantly greater learning gains in their students when compared with their weaker colleagues. Most of this evidence is based on “value added” analyses of large sets of data linking individual studentsrsquo; test scores to their teachers.
Such studies determine students average annual rates of improvement, as measured by test scores. They estimate how much value a teacher has contributed to student achievement, factoring in the gains the student was expected to make based on past performance, and in some cases, controlling for elements such as peer characteristics and background, including poverty level and family education.
Factors such as family background continue to predict a majority of the variation in student achievement, but scholars generally agree that teacher quality is probably the most important school-based factor affecting achievement. Specific estimates are difficult to arrive at because economists have been unable to link a portion of the variation in student achievement to any particular input (Sawchuk, 2011).
Back in 1998, several economists estimated that at least 7.5 percent of the variation in student achievement resulted directly from teacher quality and noted that the actual number could be as high as 20 percent (Hanushek, et al, 1998). A 1999 paper, meanwhile, puts all in-school factors, including school, teacher, and class level, at approximately 21 percent of the variation in 10th grade mathematics achievement. It further estimated that 8.5 percent was directly the result of teacher effectiveness (Goldhaber, et al, 1999).
Even so, the specific characteristics that constitute an effective teacher are hotly debated, in large part because teacher quality is extremely difficult to measure. As a result, most studies resort to measurable proxies, such as certification, academic degrees, and years of experience. Most of these characteristics bear some relationship to student scores, but on the whole, they explain only a fraction of teacher quality—perhaps as little as 3 percent of the overall variation in studentsrsquo; test scores (Rivkin, et al, 2005; Goldhaber, et al, 1999).
Of the measurable characteristics isolated for study, teaching experience has consistently been linked to student scores. On average, beginning teachers produce smaller learning gains in their students compared with more seasoned teachers. Most of the studies show that teachers grow in effectiveness over at least the first five years on the job, though the benefits of experience are less clear after that point (Nye, et al, 2004; Clotfelter, et al, March 2007, October 2007; Harris and Sass 2007).
Deep content-area knowledge is also an attribute of teachers that seems to have a positive impact on student achievement. This appears especially true for mathematics teachers. A variety of studies have found that factors such as math-licensure test scores, math certification, a math undergraduate or graduate degree, and math-focused professional development for secondary educators bear a relationship to student scores (Hill, et al, 2005; Harris and Sass, 2007; Goldhaber and Brewer 1999; Clotfelter, et al, March 2007, October 2007).
In general, most teacher-quality issues, including preparation, certification, tenure, evaluation, and licensing, continue to be the provenance of states and districts. The first major federal foray into teacher-quality standards came with the passage of the federal 资料编号：[498088]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word
以上是毕业论文外文翻译，课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
