National-Board Teachers Found to Be Effective
Teachers who earn advanced certification from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards are more effective than teachers without that credential, but there’s little evidence to show the program has transformed the field in the broader ways its founders envisioned, a long-awaited report released today by a national scientific panel finds.
The Arlington, Va.-based standards board, created in 1987, has received more than $100 million in federal funds to develop and run a system of assessments for recognizing accomplished teachers. And some states offer teachers financial incentives for earning the voluntary national certification. Between 2003 and 2007, the program awarded its certification status to more than 63,800 teachers across the country.
In the new report, however, a 17-member panel of the National Research Council says it’s still unclear whether the process itself leads to better-quality teaching, because too few studies have examined that issue. Beyond the classroom, the panel adds, some research suggests that schools are not yet making full use of the expertise of teachers who qualify for the credential, and that the teachers themselves, once they earn the credential, often move on to schools with more-advantaged student populations.
“The NBPTS has the potential to make a valuable contribution to efforts to improve teacher quality, together with other reforms intended to create a more effective environment for teaching and learning in schools, increase the supply of high-quality entrants into the profession, and improve career opportunities for teachers,” the report concludes. “Our review of the research, however, suggests that there is not yet compelling evidence that the existence of the certification program has had a significant impact on the field, teachers, students, or the education system,” it says.
Joseph A. Agueberre Jr., the chief executive officer for the nonprofit teaching board, said the report lays to rest questions about whether board certification identifies teachers who produce higher test scores. “We can now move on to the next question,” he added.
Congress called on the NRC, which is the operational arm of the National Academies, to undertake a study of the national board’s certification program more than three years ago. The NRC panel’s principal charge was to establish a framework for evaluating national teacher-certification programs, such as the NBPTS, as well as newer programs like that of the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence, in terms of their impact on student achievement, on teachers who apply and those who don’t, and their cost-effectiveness. Along the way, the panel reviewed in depth more than 20 studies of the NBPTS program and commissioned researchers to extend some of the existing analyses.
“Most of the studies asked: when students have nationally certified teachers, are test scores higher, and the answer is unambiguously yes,” said panel member Mark Dynarski, a senior fellow at Mathematica Policy Research Inc. and the director of the federal What Works Clearinghouse.
The committee struggled, though, over how to characterize that test-score impact in its entirety, which had an overall effect size of .04 for studies of students in Florida and North Carolina. Milton D. Hakel, the committee’s chairman, said some panelists saw the impact as small, while others considered it to be as large as possible, given the small amount that children’s test scores improve from year to year. In the end, the panel decided to let the effect size stand “as is.”
The panel called for more research testing the impact of nationally certified teachers beyond Florida and North Carolina and in more grades, and for studies that measure broader outcomes than test-score gains.
Certification seems to provide an effective “signal” of high-quality teaching, the panel adds, but the group also cites evidence from a case study of six states showing that administrators don’t seem to use certified teachers as mentors or team leaders, offer them new opportunities, or reward their achievements. Some teachers in that study even reported keeping their certification status “under wraps” for fear of stirring up resentment among colleagues.
“It’s somewhat of a mystery,” said Mr. Hakel, who is also a professor of industrial and organizational psychology at Bowling Green State University in Ohio. “If you think about going to a physician or a medical specialist, you see professional-board-certification certificates all over the walls. I think we’re at a relatively early stage for that in education.”
While board-certified teachers were also more likely to stay in teaching, one study showed, data from North Carolina suggest that once they achieve certification, they change jobs at a higher rate than do unsuccessful applicants for the credential. And when they move, the statistics show, they end up in teaching assignments where student-achievement levels are higher and student-poverty levels are lower.
“However,” the report cautions, “it’s not clear that this tendency is any more prevalent for board-certified teachers than for other teachers with excellent qualifications.”
In addition, while the 99,300 teachers across the country who applied for the credential—and the 63,800 who received it— is a considerable number, it represents fewer than 3 percent of the nation’s 3.7 million teachers—far short of the 10 percent the board had originally hoped to reach, according to the report. States that offer financial incentives, either by covering the $2,500 testing fee or providing salary bonuses to successful candidates, draw more participants than states that offer minimal or no incentives.
The study also turned up some disparities in application rates, with teachers from better-off schools more likely to apply than their counterparts in high-poverty schools. Also, while African-American teachers apply at the same rates as white teachers, they are underrepresented among those who earn certification.
The panel was unable to find enough studies to draw any conclusions about the cost-effectiveness of the program.
The report also calls on the national board to pay more attention to evaluating and updating its own assessments, which rely on videotapes and portfolios of teachers’ work rather than multiple-choice tests, and to explore ways to make those assessments more reliable.
Vol. 27, Issue 42