Chapter 1: Elementary and Secondary Education - Teacher Induction, Professional Development, and Working Conditions

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 1999–2000 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 1993–94 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 K–12 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 K–12 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

).[18]

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 1999–2000 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 1999–2000 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.

Footnotes

[18] Statutory salaries refer to official pay scales and are different from actual salaries, which are also influenced by other factors such as the age structure of the teaching force or the prevalence of part-time work (OECD 2002). Salaries are expressed in equivalent U.S. dollars converted using OECD purchasing parities (see discussion in chapter 4).