Examining the Effect of Professional Learning on Student Outcomes

• In Event: Conditions and Effects of Professional Learning Partnerships Focused on Ambitious and Culturally Responsive Instruction

Abstract

Purpose
PLPs are viewed as one avenue to support successful teacher change and ultimately, student learning (Penuel et al., 2015). Our national study of equity-focused PLPs examined curricular-aligned outcomes related to PL on ambitious and CR instruction. In this paper, we examine the effect of teacher PL (provided by the PLP) on student academic outcomes.

Theoretical Framework
Research demonstrates that teacher PL can improve students’ academic achievement by causing teachers to implement greater active learning strategies and collective participation among students (Desimone, 2009; Penuel et al., 2015). Moreover, PL that incorporates ambitious and CR instruction can cause teachers to implement more equitable practices in their classrooms by modifying curriculum to be more inclusive (Gay, 2010). This paper tests whether teacher participation in PL increased student learning on average, as well as for minoritized students.

Methods
We utilize three quantitative methods to answer this question. First, we descriptively test whether teachers who participated in the PL differed meaningfully from teachers who did not participate in the PL. Second, we implement difference-in-differences models to test whether changes in student test scores for PL-participating teachers increased more, relative to non-PL-participating teachers. Third, we match on pre-intervention student test scores and demographic variables before implementing the difference-in-difference estimator (Bartanen & Grissom, 2019; Ham & Miratrix, 2022).

Data
We obtained student- and teacher-level administrative data from four district partners (with additional partner data expected in Fall 2022). To identify whether participation in the PL increased student learning, our partners provided student-level data aligned with grade levels taught by PL teachers (e.g., if in one district’s PL teachers taught grades 6-8, our partner provided administrative data for grades 6-8). Ultimately, we obtained data including math test scores and student demographic characteristics for grade-aligned students in the district for the years 2016-17 to 2020-21, as depicted in Table 1.

Results
All reported results are preliminary. First, we show that selection into PL is substantial, especially across schools within districts. For instance, looking across schools and within districts, we find that PL teacher classrooms have lower test scores and more economically disadvantaged and minoritized students than non-PL teacher classrooms. However, when we look across classrooms and within schools, selection reverses: PL teachers tend to have students with higher test scores and classrooms with similar levels of economic disadvantage and minoritized students relative to classrooms of non-PL teachers. Second, we show that PL teachers increased student learning by 0.09 standard deviations relative to non-PL teachers. These effect sizes are difficult to benchmark to other PL, as PL varies in scope and purpose. Kraft (2020) shows that 0.09 is approximately the median effect size among randomized education interventions. Our next steps include analyzing heterogeneity between student subgroups and districts, supplementing our models with matching, and conducting robustness checks.

Significance
A critical question is whether PL emphasizing ambitious and CR instructional practices can increase student learning. Our preliminary results suggest that the PL evaluated here does have this potential.

Authors

• Kenneth Shores, University of Delaware
  Presenting Author

• Arielle Lentz, University of Delaware
  Non-Presenting Author

• Laura M. Desimone, University of Delaware
  Non-Presenting Author

• Sarah K. Bruch, University of Delaware
  Non-Presenting Author

• Nicholas S. Bell, University at Albany - SUNY
  Non-Presenting Author