National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 2012 Research Presession

Please note: The NCTM conference program is subject to change.

122- Principal Press: A Potential Support for Increasing Teachers' Collaboration

Wednesday, April 25, 2012: 1:00 PM-2:30 PM
Salon I/J/K/L 11 (Philadelphia Marriott Downtown)
Principal Press: A potential support to increase teacher collaboration around instructional reform

School districts are faced with a daunting task when they implement ambitious mathematics curricula and support teachers in learning instructional practices(Franke, Kazemi, & Battey, 2007; Hiebert et al., 1997) that are aligned with the learning goals in the Principles and Standards (NCTM, 2000; Cobb & Smith, 2008). High-depth, advice-seeking interactions are considered in this study as a potential support for reform.  These interactions occur when teachers seek advice from other teachers, principals, coaches and district leaders. Throughout a mathematics department, pedagogical knowledge for teaching and quality of instructional practices are not uniform and it is likely that some teachers are more expert than others for certain mathematical concepts or instructional practices.  High-depth, advice-seeking interactions are opportunities in which a more knowledgeable other (Vygotsky, 1978) can mediate the desired learning of another teacher or teachers.  One example of a high-depth, advice-seeking interaction is analyzing student work to analyze student reasoning.  Such interactions can provide insight into how students solve problems and provide resources for future instruction.  On the other hand, discussing pacing is a low-depth interaction which is not likely to improve the quality of instruction. 

This study investigates if principals with high expectations for reform instruction, who frequently observe mathematics instruction, and who participate in common planning time will be better informed on what specific changes in instruction need to occur how principals can be supported teachers in making such changes.  That being said, it is crucial that principals understand what quality instruction looks like, how teachers learn, and then how to allocate resources and press for changes in instructional practice (Stein & Nelson, 2003).  Empirically, Robinson, Lloyd, and Rowe (2008) explicate connections between principal actions and student achievement.  The largest effect sizes in their study are aligned with practices presented here: high expectations for teaching and learning, finding and participating professional development, and evaluating curriculum and instruction.  If principals can have indirect effects on student outcomes through strong instructional leadership, how can they influence teachers and teaching and ultimately student learning?

Methods and Data

Data for this analysis came from the fourth year of an ongoing, design research project that focuses on how policies can support instructional improvement in middle school mathematics for four large urban districts.[1]  Three out of the four districts adopted a research-designed curriculum[2] at the beginning of the study.  All districts have supported teachers with intensive professional development, district and school level coaches, curriculum frameworks, and common planning time.  Additionally, districts have supported principals in becoming instructional leaders who evaluate math instruction and are encouraged to push for ambitious mathematics teaching. 

A zero-inflated Poisson regression model was used to examine relationships between principal actions and teacher-reported, advice-seeking interactions.  Interview and survey data were collected from 30 principals and 120 teachers in 30 schools across the four districts.   Predictor variables are hours observing mathematics instruction per week, teacher-reported principal expectations for instruction, teacher-reported frequency of principal collaboration, the frequency of grade-level or department meetings, and the extent to which principals participate during these meetings.  Below is the basic regression model for this analysis: [Note: I saved an html file but this caused other issues.  I apologize for this omission]

Observation hours per week by principals were estimated from principal survey data and confirmed with both teacher and principal interviews.  Multiple items were reduced into factors to create proxies for teacher-reported principal expectations and teacher-reported principal collaboration (α > 0.8 for both measures).  Teacher interviews were also used to assess to what extent principals participated during grade-level meetings or department meetings (i.e. not at all to some to extensive).  The outcome variable was estimated from the network section of the teacher survey which asks teachers with whom they seek advice, how frequently these interactions occur, and which activities occur (see Coburn & Russell, 2008).  Teachers selected advice-seeking activities from 12 options (6 high depth and 6 low depth).    High-depth, advice-seeking interactions were calculated as a ratio of the number of high-depth activities selected to the total number of activities selected for a given tie times the frequency of these interaction and then summed across all reported ties for a teacher. Teaching experience, school-level coach, department size and a fixed effect for school district were added as controls to investigate other explanatory factors for teacher collaboration.

Results

 

            Results indicate that the amount of time the principals spent in teachers’ classrooms, teacher-reported principal expectations, and the level of principal participation during grade-level meetings or department meetings are all positive, significant predictors of high-depth, advice-seeking interactions.  Principal participation in meetings had the greatest effect.  A one unit change in principal participation in meetings (from no participation to some participation to extensive participation) predicted a 50% increase in high-depth, advice-seeking interactions (t = 9.52).  This finding could potentially explicate an underlying mechanism between student achievement results and actions of school leaders.  Fixed effects based on school districts were significant for only one school district, District D, in which high-depth interactions decreased by 36%.   This result could be explained by the institutional supports: D had the least number of school-based coaches and the least number of teacher collaboration meetings.   

 

Significance

If principal press can lead to more frequent, high-depth interactions between teachers, then it is possible that principals can be an additional support for reforming ambitious instruction.  Generalizability is restricted in this study because principals and teachers are situated within urban districts that have both adopted reform-oriented curricula and  supported teachers with extensive professional development and content-based coaches.  However, evaluation of instruction typically falls within the domain of principals and in general it will help to identify some key instructional leadership actions for supporting changes in instruction.  Future studies will investigate longitudinal relationships and include controls for teachers’ pedagogical knowledge for mathematics teaching (MKT) and instructional quality (IQA).   

References

Cobb, P., & Smith, T. (2008). District Development as a Means of Improving Mathematics Teaching and Learning at Scale. International handbook of mathematics teacher education, 3, 231–254.

Coburn, C., & Russell, J. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 30(3), 203.

Franke, M., Kazemi, E., & Battey, D. (2007). Mathematics teaching and classroom practice. Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, 225-256.

Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Wearne, D., Murray, H., et al. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Robinson, V., Lloyd, C., & Rowe, K. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635.

Stein, M., & Nelson, B. (2003). Leadership content knowledge. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 25(4), 423.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society.

 



[1] Designing Learning Organizations for Instructional Improvement in Mathematics, NSF award No. ESI 0554535, Co-PIs: Paul Cobb and Thomas Smith

[2] For example, Lappan, G., Fey, J. T., Fitzgerald, W. M., Friel, S. N., & Phillips, E. D. (1998). Connected Mathematics Project. Menlo Park, CA: Dale Seymour.

Lead Speaker:
Adrian Larbi-Cherif


Description of Presentation:

Implementing ambitious curricula at scale is a daunting challenge. This study used a regression model to predict the effects principals can have on teachers' collaborations in instruction.

Session Type: Poster Session

See more of: Poster Session