Insight
Research roundup: A blizzard of new findings
Mar 19, 2009 2:56 PM
That snow day? Perfect for making snowmen, staying home in pajamas, or … reading education research! Someone had to do it, and “Insight” made the sacrifice. Below is the result, some interesting new reports on education, read (in place of that juicy novel) and digested (in place of hot chocolate). Read on — more snow is unlikely this winter.
Teachers’ job satisfaction on the upswing — MetLife Survey
Every year since 1984, the MetLife Survey of the American Teacher has asked teachers across the country how they feel about their jobs. The most striking finding in this 25th-anniversary survey year is a clear increase in job satisfaction. A majority of teachers (62 percent) are “very satisfied” with their careers, compared to 40 percent in 1984. (This finding is strongest for new teachers and senior teachers.) They feel respected (66 percent), decently paid (66 percent) and three-quarters would recommend the profession to a young person, up from 45 percent in 1984.
They also rate the quality of their schools a little higher. Nine in 10 rated their school curriculum as excellent or good in 2008, compared to 81 percent in 1984. And they are more likely to report that their students arrive at school ready to learn at grade level. (However, urban teachers are much less likely than rural or suburban teachers to rate their schools’ academic standards high, their disciplinary policies as good, or their students’ skills as “good or excellent.”)
Two-thirds of American teachers say they received good training and preparation, up from 46 percent when the survey began. And more teachers say they are well-prepared to handle student challenges such as poverty, ELL status and lack of parental support.
Students are also interviewed in the survey. More say they get regular personal attention from their teacher (42 percent in 2008 versus 25 percent in 1988) and fewer complain that their teachers cannot relate to them.
One stat that went down is the percentage of teachers who value standardized tests. In 1984, 61 percent favored standardized tests; in 2008 less than half (48 percent) say these tests are effective in helping to track student performance.
— MetLife Survey of the American Teacher at www.metlife.com/assets/cao/contributions/citizenship/teacher-survey-25th-anniv-2008.pdf.
Cash for grades? Psychologists warn of unintended consequences
Borrowing from poverty research in Mexico and the developing world, Mayor Michael Bloomberg launched Opportunity NYC in 2007, a plan to pay poor students and their families for several desired behaviors, like getting checkups or holding a job. The most controversial was paying the children for good test scores — up to $25 for 4th-graders and up to $50 for 7th-graders on every standardized and interim test.
The program was privately funded and limited to about 2,500 families, though, so critics mostly jawboned to an empty house. But a recent story in The New York Times science section quoted education researchers, economists and psychologists who questioned the approach, or even warned it could backfire.
The article quoted a study by Penn State and Clemson University researchers who found that rewarding 3rd-graders with toys or candy for reading actually diminished the time they spent reading. An “extrinsic” reward like candy decreases the “intrinsic” value — the internal pleasure of reading — such that the student actually reads less.
Other researchers believe that even at an early age, children can sense that someone is trying to control their behavior and they resist, the article said. Some economists argued that with students who are failing, anything and everything should be tried. But Edward Deci, a psychologist at the University of Rochester who did some of the earliest studies on these kinds of rewards, was deeply skeptical. What about students who earn less? he asked. “The stress of that, for kids from homes with no money, I frankly think it’s unconscionable.”
— The New York Times, March 3, 2009; www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/health/03rewa.html.
Recess as a core subject, and core value
Maybe this gets filed under “duh,” but a major study of recess just found that children behave better when they have it.
Researchers at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine Pediatrics Department and Montefiore Hospital in the Bronx looked at 11,000 8- and 9-year-olds. They found those who had more than 15 minutes of recess a day showed better behavior in class.
But those who were denied recess — about 30 percent — were much more likely to be black, from lower-income families, to live in large cities, be from the Northeast or South and attend public school.
A story about the study in The New York Times cited research that the more physical fitness tests children pass, the better they do on academic tests; and that children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder improve their concentration with regular walks outdoors, especially in nature.
“Play and down time may be as important to a child’s academic experience as reading, science and math,” the Times concluded.
— Pediatrics, Vol. 123, No. 2 February 2009, pp. 431-436; The New York Times, Feb 24.
Elementary Math Curriculum — two that show promise
The federal education department’s research arm, Institute of Education Sciences, published the first results from a national study of math curricula. Which was most effective in teaching young children, especially those from poor families?
Four published curriculums were examined. Student math achievement was significantly higher in schools that used either Saxon Math, published by Harcourt Achieve, or Math Expressions, published by Houghton Mifflin Co. (Those who used Investigations in Number, Data and Space by Pearson Scott Foresman or Scott Foresman-Addison Wesley Math by the same publisher did not do as well.)
Now here’s the kicker: Saxon and Math Expressions are very different curricula. According to Education Week (March 4), Saxon is a traditional, scripted program in which teachers offer explicit instruction on procedures. Math Expressions emphasizes student reasoning and is more reform-oriented. Sorry, no end to the math wars in sight.
— Education Week, March 4; U.S. Department of Education, IES, February 2009; http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20094052/index.asp.
