Statewide Analysis

III. Supporting teachers –
The teacher's job has changed

Lessons from the SALT survey

Selected SALT Survey Findings: View Chart in PDF format

We believe in integrated curricula and standards-based instruction, but we don't often do it

For the most part, the data from the spring of 1999 changed very little from that of 1998. (The changes are noted throughout the discussion below.) In general, teachers believe in the specific philosophies of school reform, but they also report that they engage very little in practices associated with those beliefs. Unless teachers have time to plan together, they can not share strategies, nor can they work towards agreements on commonly held standards. Time for training in the new techniques and the availability of training opportunities are both significant obstacles to the implementation of these methods. Many schools, indeed most high schools, are not organized to support project-oriented instruction nor the sort of personalized education that supports both the teacher and the student meeting proficiency standards.

The teacher responses on the SALT survey do indicate a slight, but generally positive sign that both integrated instruction and family involvement are improving. These changes are too subtle for us to celebrate fully. Still, in the national studies using the survey, researchers have found that schools that make many small improvements in their levels of implementation will begin to see observable differences in the efficacy of the school over time.

Early intervention would help with "problem" students

Teacher reports of their expectations of students remained quite flat from the first year of data to the second. We can presume that the number of students arriving at school not fully ready to learn is also similar from 1998 to 1999. However, the data suggests that schools and districts have not adequately implemented the sorts of supportive mechanisms – strategies for personalization, student support centers, etc. – that give teachers the options, time and external help that would empower them to affect the outcomes of the children they teach. By all means, teachers should look to their own expectations. But without intervention from the larger community and more support to the teachers themselves, the expectations for challenged children will probably not change significantly.

The data on the very youngest children (the Teacher/Student Rating Scale) shows that teachers perceive roughly 20% of the children to have a "moderate" or "major" problem with their behavior. However, the kinds of behavior the teachers flag the most are not personality traits -- such as timid or depressed -- but behaviors like staying on task, working with others, persistence and following directions -- problems that respond well to in-class strategies and special help or attention. Since the percentage of children for whom teachers report low expectations is eerily close to RI's drop out rate, higher rates of early intervention would most likely go a long way towards improving the outlook for this cohort of "problem" children. We all know that if discipline issues go unaddressed, issues, habits and hard-to-manage behaviors only get worse as the children become adolescents.

We do not seem to trust the research-endorsed benefits of personalized education

Research shows that all children need to be known well by at least one adult in the building. Strategies for personalization, such as advisories, teaming, clusters and houses go a long way towards working on problem-solving skills because it gives the teachers time to work with students whom they know, providing coaching and modeling skills relevant to daily circumstances. Teachers need regularly scheduled time to talk together about the students.

With a big shot in the arm from the Carnegie Foundation Middle Grades Initiative, a number of RI middle schools were able to re-arrange their existing resources into structures more supportive of student learning. RI's so-called Carnegie schools implemented or are in the process of teaming their teachers, scheduling their common planning time, giving teachers more decision-making latitude, organizing more support services for their students and so on. Such changes do not bear fruit overnight because school communities must adjust to the new organization and expectations. In these schools, teachers report decreases in discipline referrals, less professional strain and burn-out, a general improvement in the school community atmosphere and increased focus on learning.

At the high school level, which tends to resist this sort of personalization, 42% of the students report that getting along with their teachers is a moderate or big problem. Sixty-five percent report that they feel like they can "never or hardly ever" talk to a teacher or other staff member in their school about personal or family problems. This would indicate that some relations between the teachers and the students are strained or muted, which cannot have a positive effect on achievement. One in three students report being robbed at school one or more times, indicating a somewhat hostile, disrespectful school climate. Fifty-eight percent indicate that their parents participate never or hardly ever in school activities or meetings – including PTA, sports events, dances, parents workshops, etc. (Charts C.2, .3, .5 and .6) The climate of some schools does not encourage a culture of teaching and learning.

Student relations with each other show some modest improvement

At all three levels (chart I.2), teachers report a small improvement among students in "shows respect to peers" and a decline in the extent to which students "are disruptive." An improvement in the student climate could pave the way for a generally improved culture of inquiry. An investment in improving relations between teachers and students would capitalize on this small rapprochement among the students.

Teacher mobility

Survey results indicate significant mobility among the teachers now and more expected with retirements (Chart A.1). Fully 30% of the teachers report that they have been teaching in the building they currently work in for three years or less. Only one third of those teachers report that they are new to teaching with only three years of experience or less. Thus, 20% of RI's veteran teachers switched schools in the last few years. We do not know the cause of such mobility among teachers. A teacher may well need a change or have found more like-minded colleagues, but school reform is hard enough without frequently changing the key players. Furthermore, 39% of the teachers have been teaching for 21 years or more and can be expected to retire in the foreseeable future, creating yet more instability. Stability is important to a child as well as a school.

Enabling the teachers to work together more

Arguably, one of the most important supports schools can organize for their teachers is the time for small groups or teams of teachers to share information about specific students, about their own curricula and about teaching, research or new materials. The professional development involved in on-going co-learning -- as well as the mutual support of other teachers -- refreshes, energizes and relieves the isolation of classroom teachers. Students greatly benefit from well-supported teachers.

Return to the Information Works Home Page