New Research Findings on Teacher to Teacher Learning: Policy Implications

Can teaching and learning improve when teachers observe effective colleagues at work? According to a recent Education Week online article (Viadero, 2009), a new study slated for publication in the October issue of the American Economics Journal: Applied Economics indicates effective teachers may help to significantly improve the practice of their colleagues, resulting in increased student achievement. To most educators, this finding resonates with what we’ve learned from constructivist learning theory, which posits that learning is socially mediated through interactions with knowledgeable peers (Palincsar, 1998). This flies in the face of conventional wisdom about the purported isolation of teachers working alone in their classrooms, unaffected by what is happening in neighboring classrooms, but this is good news, right?

When it comes to building instructional capacity and improving student achievement, the answer is unequivocally “yes.” The “spillover effects” of placing “high quality” teachers with average teachers, described by researchers C. Kirabo Jackson and Elias Bruegmann, appear to be significant. Critical consumers of research will want information on the study methodology and results, elaborated in the upcoming article, before reaching their own conclusions regarding the validity and reliability of the researchers’ claims. However, the idea of teachers picking up on the effective practices of talented colleagues has intuitive appeal.

In the current policy context, there are additional implications of teacher to teacher learning, raised by Jackson and Bruegmann. With growing national attention and press for 1) placing strong teachers in “high-needs” assignments and 2) merit-pay systems to reward effective teachers, both proposed as policy levers intended to increase student achievement, the picture becomes more complicated. What happens if merit-pay is awarded to individuals rather than whole schools? Does this threaten teacher collaboration, negating the effects of intentionally placing successful teachers with others who could benefit by the informal mentoring that occurs in a less competitive context?

These questions take on new importance given the U.S. Department of Education’s “Race to the Top” educational grant initiative, which will award funds to states with competitive applications over the next year. “Racing to the top” for funds is an arduous process, requiring significant documentation from states on continuing educational reform efforts. Among other criteria, a state without institutionalized barriers to prevent connecting teacher evaluation to student achievement (including the possibility of implementing a merit-pay system), may have a better shot at getting a grant than a union-strong state, for example. It’s like “Survivor” for states that can muster the best arguments (while quelling the swarms of buzzing political beehives) for getting their hands on the honeypot.

What should be of no surprise is that once again, we return to the economic narrative underscoring so much of human and organizational behavior. No one is immune to the lure of money, whether it is teachers looking to increase their income, or states and districts hoping for resources to assist with mounting performance expectations and growing expenses.

Nonetheless, we should be very, very careful in deciding what we privilege in education: professional collaboration or garnering financial resources for educating students. In today’s complex policy environment, pressing on one issue may mean unintended negative consequences for another. This is just one facet of a much larger picture, but it illustrates the difficulty of implementing national reform agenda composed of seemingly contradictory elements, especially given the conflicts they pose at the state and local levels.

Palincsar, A.S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 345-375.

Viadero, D. (2009, September 1). Top-notch teachers found to affect peers. Education Week, 29(3). Retrieved September 3, 2009, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2009/09/01/03 peer.html?tkn=QUQFVJpXrDlvhXsozMi8Wp9YtJjTusvyLwv9&print=1