Since the 1970s, researchers have attempted to link observational measures of instructional process to student achievement (and occasionally to other outcomes of schooling). This paper reviews extensively both historical and contemporary research to identify what is known about effective teaching.
Purpose/Objective
Good, after reviewing what is known about effective teaching, attempts to apply this to current descriptions of effective teaching and its application value for practice. Good notes that much of the “new” research on effective teaching has simply replicated what has been known since the 1980s. Although this is not unimportant (since it shows that older findings still pertain to contemporary classrooms), it is unfortunate that research has not moved beyond the relationship between general teacher behavior (those that cut across subject areas) and student achievement (as measured by standardized tests). How this information can be applied and the difficulty in using this information is examined in the paper.
Research Design
The paper is a historical analysis and reviews research on teaching from the 1960s to today.
Conclusion
This paper has stressed that our data base on effective teaching is limited— still it has some implications for practice. Even though the knowledge base is limited, there is no clear knowledge that teachers-in-training learn and have the opportunity to practice and use. It would seem that teacher education programs would want to assure that their graduates, in addition to possessing appropriate knowledge, would also have clear conceptual understanding and skills related to active teaching, proactive management, communication of appropriate expectations for learning, and the ability to plan and enact instruction that balances procedural and conceptual knowledge. Future research on the use of this knowledge base and its effects in teacher education programs would be informative. If done correctly, research on teaching can improve instruction. However, the research must be applied carefully if it is to have useful effects. And, as noted often in this paper, research must consider outcomes of schooling other than achievement such as creativity, adaptability, and problem finding.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Federation of Teachers. (2012). Raising the Bar: Aligning and elevating teacher preparation and the teaching profession. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
BaldiS., JinY., SkemerM., GreenP. J., & HergetD. (2007). Highlights from PISA 2006 Performance of U.S. 15-year-old students in science and mathematics literacy in an international context (NCES 2008-016). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
3.
BeckermanT., & GoodT. (1981). The classroom ratio of high- and low-aptitude students and its effects on achievement. American Education Research Journal, 18, 317–327.
4.
BerlinerD. (2014). Exogenous variables and value-added assessments: A fatal flaw. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1–31.
5.
BerlinerD., & BiddleB. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America's public schools. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.
6.
BerlinerD., FisherC., FilbyN., & MarliaveR. (1978). Executive summary of Beginning Teacher Evaluation Study. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory.
7.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2010). Learning about teaching: Initial findings from the Measures of Effective Teaching project. Seattle, WA: Author.
8.
BrattesaniK. A., WeinsteinR. S., & MarshallH. H. (1984). Student perceptions of differential teacher treatment as moderators of teacher expectation effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 236–247.
9.
BrophyJ. (1973). Stability of teacher effectiveness. American Educational Research Journal, 10(3), 245–252.
10.
BrophyJ. (2012). Observational research on generic aspects of classroom teaching. In AlexanderP. A. & WinneP. H. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 755–780). New York, NY: Routledge.
BrophyJ., & EvertsonC. (1981). Student characteristics and teaching. New York, NY: Longman.
13.
BrophyJ., & GoodT. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In WittrockM. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328–375). New York, NY: Macmillian.
14.
BrownellW. A. (1947). The place of meaning in the teaching of elementary school arithmetic. Elementary School Journal, 47, 256–265.
15.
BursteinL. (1980). The analysis of multilevel data in educational research and evaluation. Review of Research in Education, 8, 158–233.
16.
CarpenterT., DosseyJ., & KoehlerJ. (Eds.). (2004). Classics in mathematics educational research. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
17.
CollinsG. (2012, September 1). Only the good get rich [op-ed]. The New York Times, pp. A23.
18.
CollinsG., & Amrein-BeardsleyA. (2014). Putting growth and value-added models on the map: A national overview. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1–32.
19.
CooperH. M., & GoodT. L. (1983). Pygmalion grows up: Studies in the expectation communication process. New York, NY: Longman.
20.
CubanL. (2010). As good as it gets: What school reform brought to Austin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
Darling-HammondL. (2010). The flat world and education. How America's commitment to equity will determine our future. New York. NY: Teachers College Press.
22.
DubrielJ. B. (1977). A study of two plans for utilization of class time in first year algebra (Doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri, Columbia.
23.
EbmeierH. (1978). An investigation of the interactive effects among student types, teacher types, and treatment types on the mathematics achievement of fourth grade students. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri, Columbia.
24.
EbmeierH., & GoodT. L. (1979). The effects of instructing teachers about good teaching on the mathematics achievement of fourth-grade students. American Educational Research Journal, 16(1), 1–16.
25.
Educate America Act. (1994). From Public Law 103-227, Goals 2000.
26.
EmmerE., EvertsonC., & AndersonL. (1980). Effective classroom management at the beginning of the school year. The Elementary School Journal, 80, 219–231.
27.
EmmerE., & GerwelsM. C. (2006). Classroom management in middle and high school classrooms. In EvertsonC. & WeinsteinC. (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 407–437). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28.
EvertsonC., & WeinsteinC. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
29.
FarrS. (2010). Teaching as leadership: The highly-effective teacher's guide to closing the achievement gap. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
30.
FisherC., FilbyN., MarliaveR., CahenL., DishawM., MooreJ., & BerlinerD. (1978). Beginning teacher evaluation study. San Francisco, CA: Far West Regional Educational Laboratory.
31.
FreibergH. J., HuzinecC. A., & TempletonS. M. (2009). Classroom management—a pathway to student achievement: A study of fourteen inner-city elementary schools. Elementary School Journal, 110(1), 63–80.
32.
GoodT. (1968). Student achievement level and differential opportunity for classroom response. (Doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
33.
GoodT. (1970). Which pupils do teachers call on?Elementary School Journal, 70, 190–198.
34.
GoodT. (1996). Teaching effects and teacher evaluation. In SikulaJ., ButteryT., & GuytonE. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 617–665). New York, NY: MacMillan.
35.
GoodT. L. (2010). Forty years of research on teaching 1968–2008: What do we know now that we didn't know then? In MarzanoR. (Ed.), On excellence in teaching (pp. 31–62). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
36.
GoodT., BiddleB., & BrophyJ. (1975). Teachers make a difference.New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
37.
GoodT. L., & BradenJ. S. (2000). The great school debate: Choice, vouchers, and charters. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
38.
GoodT. L., & BrophyJ. (2008). Looking in classrooms (10th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
39.
GoodT., & GrouwsD. (1975). Teacher rapport: Some stability data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(2), 179–182.
40.
GoodT., & GrouwsD. (1979). The Missouri mathematics effectiveness project: an experimental study in fourth-grade classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(3), 355–362.
41.
HattieJ. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
HerlihyC., KargerE., PollardC., HillH., KraftM., WilliamsM., & HowardS. (2014). State and local efforts to investigate the validity and reliability of scores from teacher evaluation systems. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1–28.
43.
HiebertJ., & GrouwsD. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In LesterF. K. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–404). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
44.
HookC., & RosenshineB. (1979). Accuracy of teacher reports of their classroom behavior. Review of Educational Research, 49, 1–12.
45.
KonstantopoulosS. (2006). Trends of school effects on student achievement: Evidence from NLS:72, HSB:82, and NELS:92. Teachers College Record, 108, 2550–2581.
46.
KonstantopoulosS. (2011). Teacher effects in early grades? Evidence from a randomized experiment. Teachers College Record, 113, 1541–1565.
47.
KonstantopoulosS. (2014). Teacher effects, value-added models, and accountability. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1–21.
48.
KonstantopoulosS., & ChungV. (2011). The persistence of teacher effects in elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 48(2), 361–386.
49.
KouninJ. S. (1970). Discipline and group management in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
50.
LavigneA. (2014). Exploring the intended and unintended consequences of high-stakes teacher evaluation on schools, teachers, and students. Teachers College Record, 116(1), 1–29.
51.
LavigneA., & GoodT. (in press). Evaluating teachers and students. New York, NY: Routledge.
52.
LefsteinA. (2008). Changing classroom practice through the English National Literacy Strategy: A micro-interactional perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 45(3), 701–737.
53.
LundgrenU. (1972). Frame factors and the teaching process: A contribution to curriculum theory and theory on teaching. Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist and Wiksell.
54.
McCaslinM. (2006). Student motivational dynamics in the era of school reform. Elementary School Journal, 106, 479–490.
55.
McCaslinM., & GoodT. (1996). Informal curriculum. In BerlinerD. & CalfeeC. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
56.
MoeT. M., & ChubbJ. E. (2009). Liberating learning: Technology, politics, and the future of American education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
57.
MorganS., & PoppeE. (2012). The consequences of international comparisons for public support of K–12 education: Evidence from a national survey experiment. Educational Researcher, 41(7), 262–268.
58.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
59.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
60.
NicholsS., & GoodT. (2004). America's teenagers—myths and realities: Media images, schooling, and the social costs of careless indifference. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
61.
PayneC. (2010). So much reform, so little change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
PidgeonD. (1970). Expectation and pupil performance (Doctoral dissertation). Slough, England: National Foundation for Educational Research in England and Wales.
65.
RakesC. R., ValentineJ. C., McGathaM. B., & RonauR. N. (2010). Methods of instructional improvement in algebra: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 372–400.
66.
RaudenbushS. (1984). Magnitude of teacher expectancy effects on pupil IQ as a function of the credibility of expectancy induction: A synthesis of findings from 18 experiments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(1), 85–97.
67.
RavitchD. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. New York, NY: Basic Books.
RohrkemperM., & CornoL. (1988). Success and failure on classroom tasks: Adaptive learning and classroom teaching. Elementary School Journal, 88, 297–312.
70.
RosenshineB., & FurstN. (1973). Research on teacher performance criteria. In SmithB. O. (Ed.), Research in teacher education: A symposium.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
71.
RothsteinR. (2000). Toward a composite index of school performance. Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 409–441.
72.
RowanB., CorrentiR., & MillerR. J. (2002). What large-scale, survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the Prospects study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104(8), 1525–1567.
73.
Rubie-DaviesC. M. (2007). Classroom interactions: Exploring the practices of high and low expectation teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 289–306.
74.
Rubie-DaviesC. M. (2010). Teacher expectations and perceptions of student characteristics: Is there a relationship?British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 121–135.
75.
SahlbergP. (2010). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland?New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
76.
SchmidtW., & MaierA. (2009). Opportunity to learn. In SykesG., SchneiderB., & PlankD. (Eds.), Handbook on educational policy research (pp. 541–559). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
77.
SchoenfeldA., & PearsonP. (2009). The reading and math wars. In SykesG., SchneiderB., & PlankD. (Eds.), Handbook on educational policy research (pp. 560–580). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
78.
ShippD., & DeerG. (1960). The use of class time in arithmetic. Arithmetic Teacher, 7, 117–121.
VeldmanD. J., & SanfordJ. P. (1984). The influence of class ability level on student achievement and classroom behavior. American Education Research Journal, 21, 629–644.
84.
WeinsteinR. S., & MiddlestadtS. E. (1975). Student perceptions of teacher interactions with male high and low achievers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(4), 421.
