Teacher Quality

A paper on teacher quality that I wrote with Caroline Hoxby just got attacked in the New York Daily News. A propos the "papers versus blogs" debate of last week, I trust someone can tell me whether I should be more or less worried by this than the recent sledging we received in the Daily Kos.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Teacher Quality

  1. Dailykos is a pretty rabid site. Johnny of wetmachine.com described it as “many people all vehemently agreeing with each other”. It is the American Democrats (left?) version of freerepublic and littlegreenfootballs. They are extremely polarised politically and don’t deviate from the site’s group think. Consequently it gets trolled constantly (as do other inflexible, rabidly biased sites).

    There was a time when that site (and some others) promised to potentially alter the dynamic between the polity and people – but it has failed – and failed in a dissappointing way. It is not alone there. Several others with promise also failed.

    In summary, feel free to ignore dailykos, you will not be in a minority for doing so.

  2. Mark Harrison says:


    It got a positive review from the Gadfly this morning:


    Lifting Teacher Performance
    Andrew Leigh and Sara Mead
    Progressive Policy Institute
    April 2005

    This policy report from PPI is a succinct and astute review of the importance of teacher quality and the solutions to improve it. We are reminded that teacher quality is one of the most important factors in a child’s education, the more so for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. But it’s not up to par. The report cites weak preparation, few growth opportunities for effective teachers, and a system that demands higher numbers of lower-skilled teachers when it should be insisting on the opposite (see “Teacher can’t teach”). The standard notions for improving teacher quality are also flawed. An across-the-board pay increase would do nothing but provide all teachers (good and bad) with a few more dollars, and the current teacher certification process is credential- rather than results-based. (It appears that schools would be better off selecting teachers with high test scores and no teacher training rather than individuals with lesser skills, yet full teacher certification. Maybe that’s why private schools follow this practice.) Cutting class size is flawed policy at best and disastrous at worst, since it “risks unintentionally lowering teacher quality even further, as affluent districts make up their numbers by poaching the most capable teachers from poorer areas.” The authors instead offer three sweeping recommendations: institute well-designed performance-based teacher pay, offer incentives for teachers who work in struggling schools, and streamline the certification requirements to increase the pool of possible teachers. You can find the report at http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?knlgAreaID=110&subsecid=135&contentid=253286.

    by Michael Connolly

Comments are closed.