Support
Teaching - Policy Lever
Essence
This lever measures the quality of the support available to teachers as proxied by the availability and quality of pre-service and in-service training opportunities.
Indicator
A score ranging from 1 to 5, calculated based on policy questions. Responses are scored according to a rubric that considers the factors associated with good support systems for teachers. Two scores are reported: one for de jure policy existence and one for de facto policy implementation.
Background
Equipping teachers with the skills they need to succeed in a classroom and continuously supporting them to improve their skills is crucial. First, few (if any) individuals are born effective teachers. Everyone needs subject content knowledge, pedagogical skills, and lots of practice to be successful in the classroom. Second, adequate training and initial experience help to anticipate and minimize mistakes on the job. Several studies have found that the first few years of experience considerably improve a teacher’s effectiveness in the classroom—regardless of whether the teacher acquires this experience through clinical practice or during a probationary period (Boyd et al. 2009; Chingos & Peterson 2010; Hanushek et al. 2005; Hanushek & Rivkin 2010; Rivkin et al. 2005). This shows that teachers can improve their practice substantially, and so support mechanisms are necessary to help teachers reach their potential and perform at their best. A 2013 survey of 34 countries found that 90% of teachers had participated in professional development within the previous year (OECD 2014). But although there were high attendance rates, these trainings tended to be brief, overly theory-focused, and of low quality. Subsequently, current research shows that teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical skills did not improve as a result of these training programs (Evans et al. 2017). Recent research has shown that to be effective, training needs to be more tailored to the needs of individual teachers, integrated with classroom practice, and reinforced with frequent follow-up visits and tailored coaching (Evans & Popova 2016; Evans et al. 2017).
Instrument Used for Measurement
Measurement Approach
To measure this indicator, 14 questions are used. These 14 questions relate to availability and quality of pre-service education programs, mentoring programs, practicum experience, and professional development. They are asked in the Policy Survey (de jure) and School Survey (de facto). For example:
(de jure) Are teachers required to complete a pre-service practicum as part of their pre-service training?
(de facto) Did you attend any of the following professional development trainings specifically for teachers in the last 12 months? Approximately how many total days did the training last? Over how many weeks was this training and related follow-up spread? What was the main topic of the training? How much of the training took place in your classroom (if any)?
Instrument Sources
Service Delivery Indicators (SDI) Instrument
In-Service Teacher Training Survey Instrument (ITTSI)