“You have to know math in order to teach math.” – Tim Sass, Calder 2012

The Essential Question

How could Teach For America grads, with five weeks of teacher preparation, and other alternatively certified teachers realize better student performance in math that traditionally certified teachers? The answer is simple. The implications for implementation of the Common Core State Standards are profound.

The Answer

In a paper presented at the 2012 Calder Research Conference entitled “Certification Requirements and Teacher Quality: A Comparison of Alternative Routes to Teaching,” Tim Sass of Georgia State University offered a simple, yet unsurprising, observation. Teachers, particularly math teachers, who know their subjects better, improve student achievement more than teachers who have less expertise in their content areas. In other words, teachers have to know math before they can teach math, and the better they know it, the better they teach it. The study demonstrated that alternatively certified teachers has higher SAT scores and better preparation in specific content areas. The differences manifested themselves greatest in math instruction.

The Implications: Elementary

The Common Core State Standards will require that teachers have a deep conceptual understanding of mathematics. This is a big problem in many schools. It is not an ability problem as much as it is a preparation problem. While my expertise is not at the elementary level, my friends at that level, even in resourced, high-performing schools and districts, have told me for years that finding elementary teachers with solid preparation in mathematics and the sciences is extremely difficult. From my experience at the secondary level, we could find the math and science teachers, but we had to compete with every other school in the area for their services. They are in short supply.

Not only will the content of math instruction change as a result of the new standards, but students will be expected to apply math principles and concepts to real world situations. While content knowledge is not as much of a problem at the secondary level, the changes in the way students are assessed will pressure secondary math teachers because, for many, this is a new way of teaching. At the elementary level, both the content and process will change. What this means is that, at the elementary level, we do not have the capacity to deliver the new math standards. What this means for school leaders is that we have a massive re-training effort ahead of us.

The Implications: Secondary

In relation to the new English Language Arts (ELA) Standards, the situation is completely reversed. Elementary teachers have more expertise in “authentic literacy” including reading, writing, listening and speaking. In general, teachers at the secondary level have little or no training in literacy instruction. What this means is that, at the secondary level, we do not have the capacity to deliver the new ELA Standards. What this means for school leaders is that we have a massive re-training effort, which will take years of focused professional development, ahead of us.