How Do We Know If New Teachers Are Prepared? Considering Different Predictors of Instructional Readiness

• In Event: Preservice Courses, Student Teaching Experiences, and Beginning Teacher Outcomes

Abstract

Objective and Perspective. Teacher education programs face pressure to provide evidence that they improve outcomes for their graduates. Recent large-scale studies have linked preparation components to graduates’ workforce outcomes to provide that evidence (e.g., Goldhaber et al., 2020; Henry et al., 2014). For example, studies have focused on graduates’ self-reported readiness to teach (based on surveys) or the value they added to student achievement (VAMs) as outcomes. However, these studies are limited because surveys are prone to various forms of bias; also, VAMs make inferences about teaching quality based on student performance and are only available for a small percentage of teachers (i.e., those in tested subjects and grades).
In contrast, our study draws on graduates of preparation programs’ first-year observation ratings as the focal outcome and links this outcome to various preparation features across many programs. We administered surveys to both pre-service student teachers (PSTs) and their cooperating teachers (CTs), providing two additional measures of recent graduates’ readiness to teach. We also collected extensive information on PSTs’ preparation experiences, including the kinds of mentoring their CTs provided.
We examine which features of preparation predict how instructionally effective recent graduates are based upon their first-year observation ratings, their self-perceptions of their readiness to teach, and their CTs’ perceptions of their readiness to teach. We also consider whether the same features of preparation that predict one of these outcomes also predict the others. Further, we assess whether either survey-based measure predicts first-year observation ratings.
Data and Methods. In 2014-15, we administered surveys to all PSTs and their CTs across preparation programs in a large, Midwestern district to collect data on their preparation experiences and perceptions of readiness to teach. These surveys were connected to district administrative data, including first-year observation ratings. Our analytic sample includes over 300 PSTs who student taught in 2014-15 and were subsequently hired in the district in 2015-16. We applied Rasch methods to construct overall measures of PSTs’ and CTs’ perceptions of PSTs’ instructional readiness. We employed hierarchical linear models to estimate first-year observation ratings (or survey-based readiness measures) as a function of preparation features.
Results. We found that CTs’ perceptions of PSTs’ readiness to teach positively predicted first-year observation ratings but PSTs’ self-perceived preparedness did not. PSTs received higher first-year observation ratings when their CTs had higher observation ratings themselves, their CTs reported providing more effective coaching in specific instructional areas (including those targeted on the observation rubric), they secured a teaching position in the same school where they had student taught, and they student taught in self-contained elementary classrooms. These features, though, were mostly unrelated to the two survey-based outcome measures.
Significance. Programs tend to rely heavily on candidates’ perceptions of readiness, but this study points to the limitations of that data. Instead, the findings suggest the importance of CTs and prior student teaching experiences as additional predictors of readiness. Given the universality of CTs as a feature of teacher preparation, this study highlights the importance of recruiting instructionally-effective mentors who are also effective coaches.

Authors

• Kavita Kapadia Matsko, Northwestern University

• Matthew Ronfeldt, University of Michigan