How High School Teachers View Students and Instruction

Earlier this week, Scholastic and the Gates Foundation released the results of an extensive survey aimed to bring teachers’ voices into the discourse on education policy that was administered to over 40,000 teachers across the country. Much has been made of the results, including the revelation that many teachers would prefer more integrated and meaningful reform over higher salaries. But few education stakeholders are talking about the interesting discrepancies the survey reveals between the opinions of elementary and middle school teachers and high school teachers. These discrepancies suggest that teacher training, retention, and induction programs should be tailored to adress the needs of different types of teachers as the Obama Administration considers reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

The survey posed several questions to teachers regarding their use of data in instruction, efforts that would most likely improve student achievement, and characteristics that have a significant impact on that achievement. In quite a few cases, responses from high school teachers differed from responses from elementary and middle school teachers. For example, with respect to data usage a significant portion of elementary and middle school teachers stated that they used student performance data to discuss a student’s performance with other teachers or monitor classroom progress toward reaching Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under the federal No Child Left Behind Act “very often.” In contrast, the largest portion of high school teachers stated they used data for these purposes only “sometimes.” Similarly, a far smaller percentage of high school teachers reported using student data to identify students for supplemental services than elementary and middle school teachers (51 percent versus 86 and 72 percent, respectively).

Responses to questions about efforts that are likely to improve student achievement followed a similar pattern. While 37 percent of elementary and 36 percent of middle school teachers said that common standards across states are likely to have a “strong impact” on student achievement, only 30 percent of high school teachers thought so. Thirty-eight percent of high school teachers, on the other hand, thought it would only have a “moderate impact.”

Surprisingly, high school teachers had more faith in tougher academic standards for students. A significant share of high school teachers thought strengthening standards would have a “strong impact” on achievement, while the largest portion of elementary and middle school teachers thought it would only have a “moderate impact.”

Most revealing, however, were high school teachers’ responses to questions about how important various characteristics were to student achievement. A smaller percentage of high school teachers thought that effective and engaged teachers or principals, family involvement and support, high expectations, or supplemental education services were “absolutely essential” to student achievement than elementary and middle school teachers. Additionally, more high school teachers thought that resources for differentiating instruction and behavioral supports like counselors and social workers were only “very important” than thought that they were “absolutely essential,” opposite from elementary and middle school teachers’ responses.

These responses provide some interesting insights into high school teachers and how they view students and instruction. First, it appears that they place far more emphasis on the role of the student in academic achievement over the role of the teacher and principal than elementary and middle school teachers. In fact, 49 percent of high school teachers reported that “lack of student motivation” was the most likely reason students won’t leave high school prepared for college. In contrast, 25 percent of elementary and 43 percent of middle school teachers responded that way.

High school teachers also seem to have less faith in and reliance on movements in education like daily student data usage, differentiated instruction, and 21^st Century skills than other teachers. At the same time, however, they appear to believe in the importance of strong standards.

These conclusions suggest that one-size-fits-all federal teacher programs, like those currently included in the Teacher Incentive Fund and other Title II programs may not be effectively reaching high school teachers. High school teachers have different needs and approach their jobs differently than elementary and middle school teachers. As the Obama Administration begins to flesh out its proposals for its new “Excellent Instructional Teams” programs, they should take into account these differences and create funding streams specifically aimed at high school teachers.