How Framework for Teaching and Tripod 7Cs Evidence Distinguish Key Components of Effective Teaching

Abstract

This chapter uses data from the Measures of Effective Teaching project to study ways that adult observations using the Framework for Teaching and student perceptions using Tripod survey assessments help distinguish components of effective teaching. The approaches are found to be compatible in the components of teaching that they measure. Moreover, adults and students evaluate teaching similarly. The chapter uses value- added test score measures and student survey responses for happiness in class, effort in class and whether the teacher inspires an interest in college, as key outcomes predicted by teaching quality. The mix of teaching components that predicts value added differs systematically from the combination that predicts happiness, effort or inspiration. This chapter distinguishes multiple aspects of teaching that together predict student engagement and learning. Our primary aim is to help elementary and secondary school educators understand the components of teaching effectiveness—the types of action that produce or facilitate learning and healthy development—in order to more strategically and effectively improve their own and others' teaching. It is well know from research that some teachers routinely produce more learning than others (e.g., Rivkin, Hanushek and Kain, 2005; Kane, McCaffrey and Staiger, 2010 and 2012). Why? According to focus-group research with regular citizens, people believe the reason is that effective teachers simply care more (Chart with Kendall-Taylor, 2008). Similarly, when we ask large audiences of professional educators to select among multiple reasons that some teachers produce more learning, they too select caring as the most important reason. Are they correct? Based on classrooms sampled from more than 200 schools in six cities that participated in the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation project on Measures of Effective Teaching (MET), findings in this chapter indicate that caring is the strongest predictor of happiness, but not learning. Instead, we find that classroom management is the strongest predictor of learning. The chapter presents this and other findings, distinguishing among multiple aspects of teaching and their implications for students. Three rapidly spreading methods for assessing teacher performance are classroom observations, student surveys and test-based measures of student learning (i.e., growth or value- added scores). The latter of these—test-based measures—can help us understand how much students have learned. However, they do not indicate which aspects of teaching may need to improve in order that students might learn more in any particular classroom. Accordingly, this chapter applies two popular frameworks and associated assessment tools for measuring what teachers actually do in their classrooms. A central question is whether these two approaches—Charlotte Danielson's Framework for Teaching and Ronald Ferguson's 7Cs framework from his Tripod Project survey assessments—are mutually reinforcing as ways of diagnosing teachers' professional strengths along with areas in need of improvement. The