Both scholars and professional standards identify teachers’ knowledge of students as important to promoting effective instruction and student learning. Prior research investigates two such types of knowledge: knowledge of student thinking and teacher accuracy in predicting student performance on cognitive assessments. However, the field presents weak evidence regarding whether these constructs are amenable to accurate measurement and whether such knowledge relates to instruction and student outcomes. Without this evidence, it is difficult to assess the relevance of this form of teacher knowledge. In this article, evidence from 284 teachers suggests that accuracy can be adequately measured and relates to instruction and student outcomes. Knowledge of student misconceptions proved more difficult to measure, yet still predicted student outcomes in one model.
AnS.KulmG.WuZ. (2004). The pedagogical content knowledge of middle school, mathematics teachers in China and the U.S. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 7(2), 145–172.
2.
BallD. L.ThamesM. H.PhelpsG. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special?Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.
3.
BarnhartT.van EsE. (2015). Studying teacher noticing: Examining the relationship among pre-service science teachers’ ability to attend, analyze and respond to student thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 45, 83–93.
4.
BaumertJ.KunterM.BlumW.BrunnerM.VossT.JordanA.. . .TsaiY. M. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.
5.
BellC. A.WilsonS. M.HigginsT.McCoachD. B. (2010). Measuring the effects of professional development on teacher knowledge: The case of developing mathematical ideas. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(5), 479–512.
6.
BlackP.WiliamD. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.
7.
BorasiR. (1994). Capitalizing on errors as “springboards for inquiry”: A teaching experiment. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 166–208.
8.
CarpenterT. P.FennemaE.PetersonP. L.CareyD. A. (1988). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of students’ problem solving in elementary arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19(5), 385–401.
9.
CarpenterT. P.FennemaE.PetersonP. L.ChiangC. P.LoefM. (1989). Using knowledge of children’s mathematics thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 499–531.
10.
CarpenterT. P.MoserJ. M.RombergT. A. (Eds.). (1982). Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective. Mahweh, NJ: Erlbaum.
11.
CarlsonD.BormanG. D.RobinsonM. (2011). A multistate district-level cluster randomized trial of the impact of data-driven reform on reading and mathematics achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 378–398.
12.
CharalambousC. Y.HillH. C.McGinnD.ChinM. (2017). Content knowledge and teacher knowledge for teaching: Exploring their distinguishability and contribution to student learning. Manuscript in progress.
13.
ClarkM. A.ChiangH. S.SilvaT.McConnellS.SonnenfeldK.ErbeA.PumaM. (2013). The effectiveness of secondary math teachers from Teach For America and the Teaching Fellows Programs (NCEE Publication No. 2013–4015). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
14.
ClarkC. M.PetersonP. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Third handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255–296). New York, NY: Macmillan.
15.
CohenD. K.RaudenbushS. W.BallD. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 119–142.
16.
ColadarciT. (1986). Accuracy of teacher judgments of student responses to standardized test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 141–146.
17.
CordrayD.PionG.BrandtC.MolefeA.TobyM. (2012). The impact of the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) program on student reading achievement (NCEE Report No. 2013-4000). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
FergusonR. F. (2012). Can student surveys measure teaching quality?Phi Delta Kappan, 94(3), 24–28.
20.
GoertzM. E.OlahL. N.RigganM. (2009). Can interim assessments be used for instructional change? (CPRE Policy Briefs). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
21.
GoldhaberD.HansenM. (2010). Using performance on the job to inform teacher tenure decisions. The American Economic Review, 100(2), 250–255.
22.
GoldhaberD.HansenM. (2013). Is it just a bad class? Assessing the long-term stability of estimated teacher performance. Economica, 80(319), 589–612.
23.
HellerJ. I. (2010). The impact of Math Pathways & Pitfalls on students’ mathematics achievement and mathematical language development: A study conducted in schools with high concentrations of Latino/a students and English learners. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
24.
HelmkeA.SchraderF. W. (1987). Interactional effects of instructional quality and teacher judgment accuracy on achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3(2), 91–98.
25.
HendersonS.PetrosinoA.GuckenburgS.HamiltonS. (2008). A second follow-up year for measuring how benchmark assessments affect student achievement (REL 2008-No. 002). Waltham, MA: Regional Educational Laboratory Northeast & Islands.
26.
HickmanJ.FuJ.HillH. C. (2012). Technical report: Creation and dissemination of upper-elementary mathematics assessment modules. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
27.
HiebertJ.WearneD. (1983). Students’ conceptions of decimal numbers. Newark, DE: University of Delaware.
28.
HillC. J.BloomH. S.BlackA. R.LipseyM. W. (2008). Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Development Perspectives, 2(3), 172–177.
29.
HillH. C.BallD. L.SchillingS. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 372–400.
30.
HillH. C.BlunkM. L.CharalambousC. Y.LewisJ. M.PhelpsG. C.SleepL.BallD.L. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 26(4), 430–511.
31.
HillH. C.CharalambousC. Y.KraftM. (2012). When rater reliability is not enough: Observational systems and a case for the G-study. Educational Researcher, 41(2), 56–64.
32.
HillH. C.RowanB.BallD. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.
33.
HochweberJ.HosenfeldI.KliemeE. (2014). Classroom composition, classroom management, and the relationship between student attributes and grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 289.
34.
HogeR. D. (1983). Psychometric properties of teacher-judgment measures of pupil aptitudes, classroom behaviors, and achievement levels. The Journal of Special Education, 17(4), 401–429.
35.
HogeR. D.ColadarciT. (1989). Teacher-based judgments of academic achievement: A review of literature. Review of Educational Research, 59(3), 297–313.
36.
JacobsV. R.FrankeM. L.CarpenterT. P.LeviL.BatteyD. (2007). Professional development focused on children’s algebraic reasoning in elementary school. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 258–288.
37.
JacobsV. R.LambL. L.PhilippR. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 169–202.
38.
JacobsV. R.LambL. L.PhilippR. A.SchappelleB. P. (2011). Deciding how to respond on the basis of children’s understandings. In SherinM.JacobsV. R.PhilippR. A. (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 97–116). New York, NY: Routledge.
39.
JohnsonE. M.LarsenS. P. (2012). Teacher listening: The role of knowledge of content and students. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(1), 117–129.
40.
KaneM. (2010). Validity and fairness. Language Testing, 27(2), 177–182.
41.
KaneT. J.RockoffJ. E.StaigerD. O. (2008). What does certification tell us about teacher effectiveness? Evidence from New York City. Economics of Education Review, 27(6), 615–631.
42.
KaneT. J.StaigerD. O. (2012). Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations, student surveys, and achievement gains. Seattle, WA: The Measures of Effective Teaching Project, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
43.
KaneT. J.TaylorE. S.TylerJ. H.WootenA. L. (2011). Identifying effective classroom practices using student achievement data. Journal of Human Resources, 46(3), 587–613.
44.
KliemeE.BürgermeisterA.HarksB.RakoczyK.UfniarzK.BlumW.LeißD. (2010). Effects of assessment, grading, and feedback on grade 9 mathematics students. Unpublished manuscript.
45.
KnuthE. J.StephensA. C.McNeilN. M.AlibaliM. W. (2006). Does understanding the equal sign matter? Evidence from solving equations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(4), 297–312.
46.
KonstantopoulosS.MillerS. R.van der PloegA. (2013). The impact of Indiana’s system of interim assessments on mathematics and reading achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(4), 481–499.
47.
KraussS.BrunnerM.KunterM.BaumertJ.BlumW.NeubrandM.JordanA. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 716.
48.
MartínezJ. F.StetcherB.BorkoH. (2009). Classroom assessment practices, teacher judgments, and student achievement in mathematics: Evidence from the ECLS. Educational Assessment, 14, 78–102.
49.
McCaffreyD. F.SassT. R.LockwoodJ. R.MihalyK. (2009). The intertemporal variability of teacher effect estimates. Education Finance and Policy, 4(4), 572–606.
PapayJ. P.KraftM. A. (2015). Productivity returns to experience in the teacher labor market: Methodological challenges and new evidence on long-term career improvement. Journal of Public Economics, 130, 105–119.
52.
PetersonP. L.CarpenterT.FennemaE. (1989). Teachers’ knowledge of students’ knowledge in mathematics problem solving: Correlational and case analyses. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), 558–569.
53.
PhilippR. A.AmbroseR.LambL. L.SowderJ. T.SchappelleB. P.SowderL.. . .ChauvotJ. (2007). Effects of early field experiences on the mathematical content knowledge and beliefs of prospective elementary school teachers: An experimental study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(5), 438–476.
54.
PolikoffM. S. (2015). The stability of observational and student survey measures of teaching effectiveness. American Journal of Education, 121(2), 183–212.
55.
QuintJ. C.SepanikS.SmithJ. K. (2008). Using student data to improve teaching and learning: Findings from an evaluation of the Formative Assessments of Student Thinking in Reading (FAST-R) in Boston elementary schools. New York, NY: MDRC.
56.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
57.
ResnickL. B.NesherP.LeonardF.MagoneM.OmansonS.PeledI. (1989). Conceptual bases of arithmetic errors: The case of decimal fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8–27.
58.
RockoffJ. E.JacobB. A.KaneT. J.StaigerD. O. (2008). Can you recognize an effective teacher when you recruit one? (NBER Working Paper 14485). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
59.
RothsteinJ. (2009). Student sorting and bias in value-added estimation: Selection on observables and unobservables. Education Finance and Policy, 4, 537–571.
60.
RowlandT.HuckstepP.ThwaitesA. (2005). Elementary teachers’ mathematics subject knowledge: The knowledge quartet and the case of Naomi. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 8(3), 255–281.
61.
SadlerP. M.SonnertG.CoyleH. P.Cook-SmithN.MillerJ. L. (2013). The influence of teachers’ knowledge on student learning in middle school physical science classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1020–1049.
62.
ScatesD. E.GageN. L. (1958). Explorations in teachers’ perceptions of pupils. Journal of Teacher Education, 9(1), 97–101.
63.
ShavelsonR. J.BorkoH. (1979). Research on teachers’ decisions in planning instruction. Educational Horizons, 57, 183–189.
64.
ShavelsonR. J.KurpiusA. (2012). Reflections on learning progressions. In AlonzoA. C.GotwalsA. W. (Eds.), Learning progressions in science: Current challenges and future directions (pp. 13–26). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
65.
SherinM.JacobsV.PhilippR. (Eds.). (2011). Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes. New York, NY: Routledge.
66.
ShulmanL. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
67.
ShulmanL. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23.
68.
SireciS. G.ThissenD.WainerH. (1991). On the reliability of testlet-based tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28(3), 237–247.
69.
StarJ. R.StricklandS. K. (2008). Learning to observe: Using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107–125.
70.
SteinM. K.EngleR. A.SmithM. S.HughesE. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(4), 313–340.
71.
SüdkampA.KaiserJ.MöllerJ. (2012). Accuracy of teachers’ judgments of students’ academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 743–762.
72.
TosteJ. R.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.FuchsL. S.GilbertJ. K.ChoE.. . . BoutonB. D. (2014). Understanding unresponsiveness to Tier 2 reading intervention: Exploring the classification and profiles of adequate and inadequate responders in first grade. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 192–303.
73.
WestM. R.MortonB. A.HerlihyC. M. (2016). Achievement Network’s investing in innovation expansion: Impacts on educator practice and student achievement. Cambridge, MA: Center for Education Policy Research.
74.
WilsonS. M.ShulmanL. S.RichertA. E. (1987). “150 different ways of knowing: Representations of knowledge in teaching.” In CalderheadJ. (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking. Sussex, UK: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
75.
XuZ.HannawayJ.TaylorC. (2011). Making a difference? The effects of Teach For America in high school. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(3), 447–469.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
