NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Statistical Analysis Report January 1999

Teacher Quality:

A Report on the Preparation

and Qualifications of

Public School Teachers

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 1999-080
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Statistical Analysis Report January 1999

Teacher Quality:

A Report on the Preparation

and Qualifications of

Public School Teachers

Laurie Lewis

Basmat Parsad

Nancy Carey

Nicole Bartfai

Elizabeth Farris

Westat

Becky Smerdon

Pelavin Research Center

American Institutes for Research

Bernie Greene

Project Officer

National Center for Education Statistics

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and Improvement NCES 1999-080
U.S. Department of Education

Richard W. Riley

Secretary

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

C. Kent McGuire

Assistant Secretary

National Center for Education Statistics

Pascal D. Forgione, Jr.

Commissioner

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing,

and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional

mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in

the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and significance

of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical systems; and

review and report on education activities in foreign countries.

NCES activities are designed to address high priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable,

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high

quality data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers,

practitioners, data users, and the general public.

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a

variety of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating

information effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product

or report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to:

National Center for Education Statistics

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

555 New Jersey Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20208-5574

January 1999

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page is:

http://nces.ed.gov

Suggested Citation

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Teacher Quality: A Report on

the Preparation and Qualifications of Public School Teachers, NCES 1999-080, by Laurie Lewis, Basmat

Parsad, Nancy Carey, Nicole Bartfai, Elizabeth Farris, and Becky Smerdon. Bernie Greene, project

officer. Washington, DC: 1999.

Contact:

Edith McArthur

(202) 219-1442

Bernie Greene

(202) 219-1366

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328
iii

Executive Summary

Background

In his 1997 State of the Union Address, President

Clinton issued a “Call to Action” that included as

a priority improving the quality of teachers in

every American classroom. President Clinton’s

speech reflects growing concern over the

condition of education and the nation’s need for

excellent teachers. The nation’s educational

system must provide our children with the

knowledge, information, and skills needed to

compete in a complex international marketplace.

Good teachers are the hallmark of such an

educational system; they are integral to children’s

intellectual and social development.

In response to these concerns and expectations,

this study, undertaken by the National Center for

Education Statistics (NCES), using its Fast

Response Survey System (FRSS), provides a

profile of the quality of the nation’s teachers.

Providing such a profile is not an easy task.

Teacher quality is a complex phenomenon, and

there is little consensus on what it is or how to

measure it. For example, definitions range from

those that focus on what should be taught and

how knowledge should be imparted to the kinds

of knowledge and training teachers should

possess. There are, however, two broad elements

that most observers agree characterize teacher

quality: (1) teacher preparation and qualifications, and (2) teaching practices. The first refers

to preservice learning (e.g., postsecondary

education, certification) and continued learning

(e.g., professional development, mentoring). The

second refers to the actual behaviors and practices

that teachers exhibit in their classrooms (U.S.

Department of Education, 1996a). Of course,

these elements of teacher quality are not

independent; excellent teacher preparation and

qualifications should lead to exemplary teaching

behaviors and practices.

This FRSS report is based on current NCES

efforts to collect data on the first of these

elements (i.e., teacher preparation and

qualifications), using a nationally representative

survey of full-time public school teachers whose

main teaching assignment is in English/language

arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign

language, mathematics, or science, or who teach a

self-contained classroom. Specifically, it includes

indicators of preservice and continued learning

(e.g., degrees held, certification, teaching assignment, professional development opportunities,

and collaboration with other teachers). In

addition, because schools and communities play

an important role in shaping and maintaining

high-quality teachers, this study examines the

work environments in which educators teach

(e.g., formal induction procedures for new

teachers, parental support).

This report is timely in light of recent concerns

over the quality of our educational system and our

teachers. Teachers’ professional preparation (as

well as their working conditions) has been

identified as fundamental to improving elementary and secondary education (National

Commission on Teaching and America’s Future,

1996). At the core of educational reforms to raise

standards, reshape curricula, and restructure the

way schools operate is the call to reconceptualize

the practice of teaching. Teachers are being

asked to learn new methods of teaching, while at

the same time they are facing the greater

challenges of rapidly increasing technological

changes and greater diversity in the classroom.

The FRSS survey indicates that currently less

than half of American teachers report feeling

“very well prepared” to meet many of these

challenges:

n Although many educators and policy analysts

consider educational technology a vehicle for

transforming education, relatively few

teachers reported feeling very well prepared

to integrate educational technology into

classroom instruction (20 percent).

n While 54 percent of the teachers taught

limited English proficient or culturally

diverse students, and 71 percent taught

students with disabilities, relatively few
iv

teachers who taught these students (about 20

percent) felt very well prepared to meet the

needs of these students. Their feelings of

preparedness did not differ by teaching

experience.

n Only 28 percent of teachers felt very well

prepared to use student performance

assessment techniques; 41 percent reported

feeling very well prepared to implement new

teaching methods, and 36 percent reported

feeling very well prepared to implement state

or district curriculum and performance

standards.

This national profile of teacher preparation,

qualifications, and work environments provides a

context for understanding why many teachers do

not report feeling very well prepared to meet

many of the challenges they currently face in their

classrooms. Key findings are provided in three

major areas: (1) preservice learning and teaching

assignment; (2) continued learning; and (3)

supportive work environment.

Key Findings

Preservice Learning and

Teaching Assignment

Growing concern that a number of the nation’s

teachers are underqualified to teach our children

has focused attention on their preservice learning.

For example, concern regarding preservice

learning has been directed toward teachers’

postsecondary degrees—that is, the idea that

teachers, particularly secondary teachers, should

have an academic major rather than a general

education degree (Ravitch, 1998). In addition,

certification policies have drawn criticism—

specifically, that a growing number of the

nation’s teachers are entering classrooms with

emergency or temporary certification (Riley,

1998). Finally, attention is increasingly directed

toward teaching assignments—that is, teachers

being assigned to teach subjects that do not match

their training or education (U.S. Department of

Education, 1996b). Results of the 1998 FRSS

survey indicate that:

n Virtually all teachers had a bachelor’s degree,

and nearly half (45 percent) had a master’s

degree. More high school teachers had an

undergraduate or graduate major in an

academic field (66 percent), compared with

elementary school teachers (22 percent) and

middle school teachers (44 percent).

n Most of the teachers (92 percent and 93

percent, for departmentalized and general

elementary, respectively) were fully certified

in the field of their main teaching assignment.

However, emergency and temporary

certification was higher among teachers with

3 or fewer years of experience compared to

teachers with more teaching experience. For

example, 12 percent of general elementary

classroom teachers with 3 or fewer years of

experience had emergency or temporary

certification, whereas less than 1 percent of

general elementary classroom teachers with

10 or more years of experience had

emergency or temporary certification. The

results are similar for departmentalized

teachers.

n Despite the fact that the measure of out-offield teaching used in this report is

conservative—it only includes teachers’ main

teaching assignments in core fields—the

results indicate that a number of educators

were teaching out of field. For example, the

percent of teachers in grades 9 through 12

who reported having an undergraduate or

graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field was 90 percent for

mathematics teachers, 94 percent for science

teachers, and 96 percent for teachers in

English/language arts, social studies/social

science, and foreign language. This means

that 10 percent of mathematics teachers, 6

percent of science teachers, and 4 percent of

English/language arts, foreign language, and

social studies/social science teachers in

grades 9 through 12 were teaching out of

field. The percent of teachers who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or

minor in their main teaching assignment field

was significantly lower for teachers of grades

7 through 12 than for teachers of grades 9

through 12 for mathematics (82 percent),

science (88 percent), English/language arts

(86 percent), and social studies/social

sciences (89 percent), indicating that teachers
v

in grades 7 and 8 are less likely to be teaching

in field than are teachers in grades 9 through

12.

Continued Learning:

Professional Development

and Teacher Collaboration

In order to meet the changing demands of their

jobs, high-quality teachers must be capable and

willing to continuously learn and relearn their

trade. Professional development and collaboration with other teachers are strategies for building

educators’ capacity for effective teaching,

particularly in a profession where demands are

changing and expanding. However, traditional

approaches to professional development (e.g.,

workshops, conferences) have been criticized for

being relatively ineffective because they typically

lack connection to the challenges teachers face in

their classrooms, and they are usually short term.

Research suggests that unless professional

development programs are carefully designed and

implemented to provide continuity between what

teachers learn and what goes on in their

classrooms and schools, these activities are not

likely to produce any long-lasting effects on

either teacher competence or student outcomes

(Fullan with Stiegelbauer, 1991). In addition to

quality professional development, peer

collaboration has also been recognized as

important for teachers’ continuous learning. The

1998 survey indicates that:

n Virtually all teachers participated in

professional development activities (99

percent) and at least one collaborative activity

(95 percent) in the last 12 months.

Participation in professional development

activities typically lasted from 1 to 8 hours, or

the equivalent of 1 day or less of training.

Teachers were most likely to participate in

professional development activities focused

toward areas that reformers emphasize (e.g.,

implementing state or district curriculum and

performance standards, integrating technology into the grade or subject taught, using

student performance assessment techniques).

n Nineteen percent of teachers had been

mentored by another teacher in a formal

relationship; 70 percent of teachers who were

mentored at least once a week reported that it

improved their teaching “a lot.”

n Increased time spent in professional

development and collaborative activities was

associated with the perception of significant

improvements in teaching. For every content

area of professional development, a larger

proportion of teachers who participated for

more than 8 hours believed it improved their

teaching “a lot” compared with teachers who

participated for 8 hours or less (figure E).

For example, teachers who spent more than 8

hours in professional development on indepth study in the subject area of their main

teaching assignment were more likely than

those who spent 1 to 8 hours to report that

participation in the program improved their

teaching a lot (41 percent versus 12 percent).

Moreover, teachers who participated in

common planning periods for team teachers

at least once a week were more likely than

those who participated a few times a year to

report that participation improved their

teaching a lot (52 percent versus 13 percent).

Supportive Work Environment

Teachers’ work environment is the final aspect of

teacher quality addressed in this report. In

addition to teacher learning, one key factor to

understanding teacher quality is to focus on what

happens to teachers once they enter the work

force, including if they receive support from the

schools and communities in which they work and

from the parents of the children they teach. The

1998 FRSS survey indicates that:

n One-third of teachers had participated in an

induction program when they first began

teaching. However, newer teachers were

more likely to have participated in some kind

of induction program at the beginning of their

teaching careers than were more experienced

teachers (65 percent of teachers with 3 or

fewer years of experience versus 14 percent

of teachers with 20 or more years of

experience). This FRSS survey did not elicit

information regarding the intensity or

usefulness of the induction programs.
vi

Figure E.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they believe

the activity improved their teaching a lot: 1998

7

12 12 12 10

13

8

9

20

38 39 41

35

40 42

38

0

20

40

60

80

100

State or 

district

curriculum 

and 

performance

standards

Integration of

educational

technology in

the grade or

subject you

teach

New 

methods 

of teaching

(e.g.,

cooperative

learning)

In-depth study

in the subject

area of your

main teaching

assignment

Student

performance

assessment

Classroom

management,

including

student

discipline

Addressing 

the needs of

students with

disabilities

Addressing

the needs of

students with

limited

English

proficiency or

from diverse

cultural

backgrounds

Percent

1 to 8 hours

More than 8 hours

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

n Teachers perceived relatively strong collegial

support for their work; 63 percent strongly

agreed that other teachers shared ideas with

them that were helpful in their teaching. In

addition, many teachers also felt supported by

the school administration, with 55 percent

agreeing strongly that the school administration supported them in their work and 47

percent agreeing strongly that goals and

priorities for the school were clear.

n Teachers perceived somewhat less support

from parents than from other teachers and the

school administration. Only one-third of

teachers agreed strongly that parents

supported them in their efforts to educate

their children.

n Collegial, school, and parental support varied

by the instructional level of the school, with

elementary school teachers perceiving

stronger support than high school teachers.

The results of this survey provide a national

profile of teacher quality, specifically focused on

teachers’ learning (both preservice and continued)

and the environments in which they work.

Included is important information regarding

teachers’ education, certification, teaching assignments, professional development, collaboration,

and supportive work environment. In addition,

comparisons by instructional level and poverty

level of the school provide information about the

distribution of teacher quality. This information

provides a context for understanding why few

teachers report feeling very well prepared to meet

the challenges they face in their classrooms. This

report is the first in a series of biennial reports

that will be undertaken by NCES. Thus, the

information provided here should provide a

benchmark for these important dimensions of

teacher quality and preparation.
vii

Table of Contents

Section Page

Executive Summary............................................................................................................... iii

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1

Teacher Quality: How Has It Been Defined?.............................................................. 2

Teaching Practices.............................................................................................. 2

Teacher Preparation and Qualifications............................................................... 3

Supportive Working Conditions.......................................................................... 4

The Definition of Teacher Quality Used in This Report....................................... 5

Teacher Quality: How Has It Been Studied?............................................................... 5

Classroom Observation ....................................................................................... 5

Teacher Testing .................................................................................................. 6

Student Achievement Tests................................................................................. 6

Large-Scale Surveys ........................................................................................... 7

The Measurement Approach Used in This Report................................................ 7

Organization of This Report........................................................................................ 8

2 Preservice Learning and Teaching Assignment ........................................................... 9

Teacher Education ...................................................................................................... 10

Teacher Certification .................................................................................................. 13

Teaching Assignment: In-Field Teaching ................................................................... 16

In-Field Teaching Among Teachers in Grades 7 through 12 ................................ 17

In-Field Teaching Among Teachers in Grades 9 through 12 ................................ 19

Summary .................................................................................................................... 20

3 Continued Learning .................................................................................................... 21

Formal Professional Development............................................................................... 21

Content of Professional Development.................................................................. 22

Professional Development and Teaching Experience........................................... 24

Intensity of Professional Development Activities ................................................ 26

Perceived Impact of Professional Development................................................... 27

Collaboration with Other Teachers.............................................................................. 28

Participation in Collaborative Activities.............................................................. 30

Frequency of Participation .................................................................................. 31

Perceived Effect of Participation ......................................................................... 31

Summary .................................................................................................................... 33
viii

Table of Contents (continued)

Section Page

4 Supportive Work Environment.................................................................................... 35

Induction Programs..................................................................................................... 35

Class Size ................................................................................................................... 37

Parent and School Support.......................................................................................... 40

Summary .................................................................................................................... 44

5 Teachers’ Feelings of Preparedness............................................................................. 47

Teachers’ Preparedness for Classroom Requirements.................................................. 47

Teacher Preparedness and Teaching Experience.......................................................... 49

Teacher Preparedness and Participation in Professional Development ......................... 50

Teacher Preparedness and Intensity of Professional Development ............................... 51

Teacher Preparedness and Collaborative Activities...................................................... 52

Summary .................................................................................................................... 55

6 Conclusions................................................................................................................ 57

References.................................................................................................................. 59

Suggested Readings.................................................................................................... 63

List of Appendices

A: Survey Methodology and Data Reliability................................................................... A-1

B: Detailed Tables of Estimates and Tables of Standard Errors for the 1998 FRSS Survey B-1

C: Detailed Tables of Estimates and Tables of Standard Errors for the

1993-94 SASS Study.................................................................................................. C-1

D: Standard Error Tables for Text Tables and Figures...................................................... D-1

E: 1998 Teacher Survey on Professional Development and Training Fast Response

Survey System Questionnaire ..................................................................................... E-1

F: Selected Questionnaire Items from the 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey Teacher

Questionnaire ............................................................................................................. F-1
ix

Table of Contents (continued)

List of Text Tables

Text Table Page

1 Percent of full-time public school teachers who majored in various fields of study for

a bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998... 12

2 Percent of full-time public school teachers who majored in various fields of study for

a bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1993-94......................................................................................................................... 13

3 Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state:

1998.............................................................................................................................. 14

4 Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state:

1993-94......................................................................................................................... 14

5 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1998............................................. 17

6 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1993-94....................................... 18

7 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1998............................................. 19

8 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1993-94....................................... 20

9 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months in various content areas, by teaching

experience: 1998 .......................................................................................................... 25

10 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities since the end of the school year in various content areas, by

teaching experience: 1993-94 ...................................................................................... 26

11 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the number of hours spent in

professional development activities in the last 12 months in various content areas:

1998.............................................................................................................................. 26

12 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the number of hours spent in

professional development activities since the end of the last school year in various

content areas: 1993-94................................................................................................. 27

13 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their teaching: 1998 ........................................................ 27

14 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating that the activity improved

their teaching a lot, by teaching experience: 1998 ......................................................... 28
x

Table of Contents (continued)

List of Text Tables (continued)

Text Table Page

15 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent to which

participation in professional development activities in various content areas improved

their classroom teaching, by the number of hours spent in professional development

in that content area in the last 12 months: 1998............................................................. 29

16 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in activities related to

teaching in the last 12 months, by frequency of participation: 1998............................... 32

17 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities

related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they believe

the activity improved their teaching: 1998 .................................................................... 32

18 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent to which

participation in activities related to teaching improved their classroom teaching, by

the frequency with which they participated in that activity in the last 12 months:

1998.............................................................................................................................. 34

19 Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school characteristics: 1998....... 38

20 Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school characteristics:

1993-94......................................................................................................................... 39

21 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to

do various activities in the classroom: 1998.................................................................. 48

22 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well prepared to

do various activities in the classroom, by teaching experience: 1998............................. 50

23 Comparison of recent teacher participation in professional development in various

content areas and perceived teacher preparedness for classroom requirements in those

content areas: 1998....................................................................................................... 51

24 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to

do various activities in the classroom, by the number of hours spent in professional

development in the content area of the activity in the last 12 months: 1998................... 53

25 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well prepared to

do various classroom activities, by whether they participated in various teachingrelated activities in the last 12 months: 1998................................................................. 54
xi

Table of Contents (continued)

List of Figures

Figure Page

E Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their teaching a lot: 1998................................................. vi

1 Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold a master’s degree, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ....................................................................... 11

2 Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold a master’s degree, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 ................................................................. 12

3 Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings with a regular or standard state certificate or advanced

professional certificate, by teaching experience: 1998................................................... 15

4 Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings with a regular or standard state certificate or advanced

professional certificate, by teaching experience: 1993-94............................................. 15

5 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months that focused on various topics: 1998......... 23

6 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities since the end of the last school year that focused on various

topics: 1993-94 ........................................................................................................... 23

7 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months that addressed the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds, by percent

minority enrollment in the school: 1998........................................................................ 24

8 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months that addressed the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds, by region: 1998....... 25

9 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities

related to teaching in the last 12 months: 1998.............................................................. 30

10 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in mentoring activities in

the last 12 months, by teaching experience: 1998.......................................................... 31

11 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent to which being

mentored improved their classroom teaching, by teaching experience: 1998 ................. 33

12 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program when they first began teaching, by teaching experience: 1998......................... 36

13 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program during their first year of teaching, by teaching experience: 1993-94............... 36

14 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the length of the formal

induction program in which they participated when they first began teaching: 1998..... 37

15 Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers: 1998...................................... 40
xii

Table of Contents (continued)

List of Figures (continued)

Figure Page

16 Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers: 1993-94................................ 41

17 Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by school instructional level:

1998.............................................................................................................................. 42

18 Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by school instructional level:

1993-94......................................................................................................................... 43

19 Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by teaching experience:

1998.............................................................................................................................. 43

20 Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by teaching experience:

1993-94......................................................................................................................... 44

21 Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing that parents

support them in their efforts to educate their children, by percent of students in

school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch: 1998.......................................... 45

22 Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing that they receive a

great deal of support from parents for the work they do, by percent of students in

school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch: 1993-94 ................................... 45

23 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well or

moderately well prepared to address the needs of students with limited English

proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds, by percent minority enrollment in

the school: 1998 ........................................................................................................... 49

24 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well prepared to

do various classroom activities, by whether they participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months that focused on these content areas:

1998.............................................................................................................................. 52
—1—

Every child needs—and deserves—dedicated, outstanding teachers, who know

their subject matter, are effectively trained, and know how to teach to high

standards and to make learning come alive for students.

President Clinton, September 1996.

1. INTRODUCTION

In his 1997 State of the Union address, President

Clinton issued a “Call to Action” that included as

a priority improving the quality of teachers in

every classroom. President Clinton’s speech

reflects growing concern over the condition of

education and the nation’s need for excellent

teachers. Now more than ever, success is

determined by an individual’s ability not only to

read and write, but also to frame and solve

complex problems and continually learn new

skills. The nation’s educational system is

increasingly being asked to provide our children

with the knowledge, information, and skills

needed to compete in an increasingly complex

international marketplace. Good teachers are the

hallmark of such an educational system; they are

integral to children’s intellectual and social

development. Therefore, they must know how to

teach in ways that help our children reach high

levels of competence.

A national profile of teacher quality is a necessary

tool for tracking our progress toward this goal.

However, providing such a profile is not an easy

task. Teacher quality is a complex phenomenon,

and there is little consensus on what it is or how

to measure it. Definitions range from those that

focus on what should be taught and how

knowledge should be imparted to the kinds of

knowledge and training teachers should possess.

Efforts to collect such data have included diverse

methods, such as classroom observations and

videotaping, the administration of large-scale

surveys, and the collection of artifacts (e.g.,

teacher logs, homework).

There are, however, two broad elements that

characterize teacher quality: teacher preparation

and qualifications, and teaching practices. The

first refers to preservice learning (e.g.,

postsecondary education, certification), teaching

assignment, continued learning (e.g., professional

development, collaboration with other teachers,

teaching experience), and general background

(e.g., demographics, aptitude, life experience).

The second refers to the actual quality of teaching

that teachers exhibit in their classrooms (U.S.

Department of Education, 1996a). Of course,

these two elements of teacher quality are not

mutually exclusive; excellent teacher preparation

and qualifications are expected to lead to

exemplary teaching.

This study is based on current efforts by the

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)

to collect data on key indicators of teacher

preparation and qualifications, using a large-scale

survey administered to a nationally representative

sample of full-time, public school teachers whose

primary teaching assignment is in English/

language arts, social studies/social sciences,

foreign language, mathematics, or science or who

teach a self-contained classroom. Specifically,

this report includes indicators of preservice and

continued learning (e.g., degrees held,

certification, teaching assignment, professional

development opportunities, collaboration with

other teachers, teaching experience). Because

schools and communities play an important role

in shaping and maintaining high-quality teachers,

this report also examines the work environments

in which educators teach (e.g., formal induction

procedures for new teachers, class size, parental

support).

This report is timely in light of recent concerns

about the quality of our educational system and

our teachers. Many of these concerns draw

attention to such issues as the training and support

teachers receive (National Commission on

Teaching and America’s Future—NCTAF, 1996)

and the number of teachers providing instruction
—2—

outside of their subject-matter fields (U.S.

Department of Education, 1996b). As a recent

review of the research indicates, teacher

qualifications and preparation are important

elements of teacher effectiveness and important

factors in determining student achievement

(National Commission on Teaching and

America’s Future, 1997). This study of teacher

quality, conducted using the NCES Fast Response

Survey System (FRSS), provides a national

profile of the current state of teacher preparation

and qualifications for full-time public school

teachers, as well as several indicators of their

work environment.

The remainder of this chapter is divided into two

main sections. The first section describes the

current thinking about teacher quality—the many

ways it is defined—and concludes with the

definition used in this study. The second section

describes the current approaches used to measure

teacher quality and concludes with a discussion of

the measurement approach used in this study.

Teacher Quality:

How Has It Been Defined?

Perhaps the most traditional approach to

characterizing teacher quality is the “expert

teacher study,” which focuses on teachers who

have been identified as successful by their

administrators or peers. This field of research is

rich in detail, describing how successful teachers

connect what they know with how they teach.

For example, researchers have found that expert

teachers use knowledge about the children in their

classrooms—their backgrounds, strengths, and

weaknesses—to create lessons that connect new

subject matter to students’ experiences

(Leinhardt, 1989; Westerman, 1991). They also

use this knowledge to adapt their teaching to

accommodate children who learn in different

ways. Expert teachers know how to recognize

children experiencing difficulties, diagnose

sources of problems in their learning, and identify

strengths on which to build. This skill is

particularly important because a growing number

of students with a wider range of learning needs

(i.e., students whose first language is not English

and students with learning differences and

disabilities) are entering and staying in school.

One strength of the expert teacher research is that

it relies on intuitive logic, which supports the

belief that it is possible to identify good teachers

by observing them and that, once identified, the

teachers’ strengths can be determined and

recorded. This body of research also confirms

what many people envision a high-quality teacher

to be—someone who understands children and

knows how to assist their learning. For example,

the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and

Support Consortium (INTASC, 1995) established

10 key principles it believes to be central tenets of

effective teaching. The principles state that

teachers should be able to understand their

subject matter and relate it to students, adopt

teaching strategies that are responsive to different

learners, employ diverse instructional strategies,

establish proper assessment tools to measure

student development, and engage in continual

curriculum evaluation and professional development (INTASC Core Standards).

However, aside from such broad notions of

teacher quality, there is little consensus regarding

its precise definition (Stodolsky, 1996). That is,

there is no single answer to the question “What

qualifications and practices characterize highquality teachers?” There are many different and

sometimes conflicting views of what constitutes a

good teacher. These views, as discussed below,

address not only teaching practices, but also

teacher preparation and qualifications as well as

the school environments where teachers work.

Teaching Practices

The disagreement over basic skills versus

complex thinking approaches to instruction is one

example of the key disputes currently surrounding

definitions of high-quality teaching practice.

Although viewing these techniques as opposing

approaches represents a simplification of the

issue, these two instructional methods do

illustrate the extremes of the current debate.

The first form of instruction traditionally has been

conceptualized as the transmission of facts to

students, who are seen as passive receptors. In

classrooms where this type of teaching

predominates, teachers typically conduct lessons

through a lecture format, instruct the entire class

as a unit, write notes on the chalkboard, and pass
—3—

out worksheets for students to complete. In such

classrooms, knowledge is presented as fact. This

is the type of instruction with which most

Americans are familiar.

By contrast, in classrooms characterized by

higher order tasks, typically described as

“constructivist,” students are encouraged to pose

hypotheses and to explore ways to test them.

They are encouraged to weigh information from

these “tests” with previous experiences or

understanding of the topic. Students then

“construct” a new understanding of subject

matter. Although many recent school reform

efforts advocate such innovative instruction (e.g.,

Coalition of Essential Schools—Sizer, 1992;

National Association of Secondary School

Principals and the Carnegie Foundation for the

Advancement of Teaching—NASSP, 1996), there

is much debate regarding the use and

implementation of such instructional techniques.

For example, opposition may come from parents

and teachers who hold more traditional views of

teaching and learning. Moreover, the concerns of

parents, teachers, and students about access to

colleges—which is based, in part, on high

performance on standardized tests of recognized

skills and facts—may discourage the use of

innovative instructional techniques (Talbert and

McLaughlin, 1993). Studies of these constructivist teaching methods have been limited because

such instruction has only recently been

implemented. The existing studies typically use

classroom observation in a limited number of

settings.

Teacher Preparation and Qualifications

As with teaching practices, there is debate

surrounding the preparation and qualifications

that characterize high-quality teachers.

Compared to other fields, disputes and

ambiguities regarding the knowledge base and

competence required of professionals are

particularly striking in teaching (Sykes, 1990).

There is little dispute that teachers ought to have

a postsecondary education and possess strong

knowledge of the subjects they teach, but beyond

this there is some disagreement about what

individuals need to know and be able to do in

order to teach effectively. Moreover, as

researchers struggle to quantify teacher

preparation and qualifications, some critics feel

that studies of teachers’ credentials and

knowledge do not provide enough information

about teacher quality—that is, indicators of

teacher preparation and qualifications do not

directly address the actual quality of instructional

practices. As these debates are highlighted in the

paragraphs that follow, however, it is important to

note that there are some well-established

indicators of teacher preparation and qualifications that do inform researchers, policymakers,

and education consumers.

During an NCES conference presentation, David

Mandel (1996, p. 3-31), former Vice President for

Policy Development at the National Board for

Professional Teaching Standards, stated:

What is known is the type of

education credentials teachers have

accumulated and the type of state

licenses they have been granted. This

information has proven useful in

gaining a rough sense of how wellprepared teachers are to take on the

assignments they are handed... But

such data, even when positive,

provide only the most modest

threshold of confidence regarding the

quality of practice in the nation’s

schools.

Other researchers agree that understanding

teacher preparation and qualifications requires

more than determining whether or not a teacher

has a degree or certification. The National Board

for Professional Teaching Standards describes

teaching as a complex skill involving multiple

talents (NBPTS, 1998). Ballou and Podgursky

(1997, 1998) raise important measurement issues

in their discussion of ways in which to attract

“brighter” individuals into the teaching pool. In

this discussion, they insist that flexibility in

certification and personnel policies facilitates the

entry of talented individuals into teaching. The

implication of their argument is that extensive

formal training may not necessarily create good

teachers. The authors suggest that talented

individuals may be less likely to remain in teacher

training programs that require extended

commitment; they may be more likely to seek

more lucrative professions. According to their
—4—

logic, extended formal training does not

necessarily reflect teacher quality. It is important

to note, however, the other side of the debate; that

is, in addition to talent and subject-matter

knowledge, prospective teachers must also be

trained to teach children (NCTAF, 1996).

Supportive Working Conditions

In addition to teacher preparation and

qualifications and teaching practice, investigations of teacher quality have included studies of

what happens to teachers once they enter the

workforce. This perspective stems from the

premise that classrooms and schools become

effective when talented people are teaching in

workplaces that are stimulating and rewarding

(Fullan with Stiegelbauer, 1991). In order to

promote high-quality teaching that will in turn

produce high-quality learning, teachers need

support from the schools and communities in

which they work (including such issues as

induction programs for new teachers and the

number of students for whom teachers are

responsible) and support from the parents of the

children they teach.

Class size. Although the research on class size is

somewhat mixed—some research studies suggest

positive effects of reduced class size, others

suggest little effect—it seems reasonable to

assume that smaller class size may facilitate

teachers’ work. In order for teachers to become

“experts” as defined by the expert—teacher

literature, it is important for them to truly know

and understand the children in their classrooms,

which clearly would be easier if there were fewer

children. Some of the research on class size

supports this logic. For example, studies of

Tennessee’s Project STAR indicate that students

in smaller classes (13-17 students) significantly

outperformed students in larger classes (22-25

students) on achievement tests in mathematics

and reading (Finn and Achilles, 1990; Word et

al., 1990). Ferguson (1990) reported similar

findings in Texas; classes enrolling more than 18

students were associated with lower reading and

math test scores for grades 1-7. To explain the

class size effects, researchers have cited the

smaller number of disruptions, the increased

teacher attention for students, and the increased

opportunity for student participation in smaller

classrooms (Achilles, 1996). Other researchers

argue that reducing class size has little or no

effect on student performance. In an examination

of trend data from the 1950s to 1986, Tomlinson

(U.S. Department of Education, 1988) did not

find a consistent relationship between class size

and standardized test scores. Moreover, based on

a review of the literature, Odden (1990) argued

that class size reduction produces only modest

gains in student achievement and does not justify

the cost of implementing such reform.

Induction of new teachers. Research has found

that the attrition rates of new teachers are five

times higher than those of their more experienced

counterparts (Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation, 1997). In order to introduce beginning

teachers into the profession with support and

guidance, many districts have implemented

formal induction programs. These programs can

have two goals: to assist beginning teachers with

instruction and to prepare them to meet state

certification requirements. A key feature of many

programs is the mentoring aspect—the pairing of

an experienced teacher with a new teacher.

Responsibilities of the mentor may include

providing guidance on curriculum, classroom

management, and assessment (Galvez-Hjornevik,

1986). It is expected that mentoring relationships

play a critical role in the support, training, and

retention of new teachers (King and Bey, 1995).

Therefore, by easing the transition into full-time

teaching, formal induction programs provide new

practitioners with skills and support structures to

develop effective teaching practices. It is

important to note that in addition to formal

induction of new teachers, there are many

important avenues for informal induction (e.g.,

team teaching, common planning time and other

activities which results in informal collaboration

between new and experienced teachers).

Parental support. An extensive body of

research has found what many parents and

educators already know—children prosper when

their parents are actively involved in their

education. Research has shown that support from

families, including greater family involvement in

children’s learning, is a critical factor leading to a

high-quality education (U.S. Department of

Education, 1994a). Policymakers have tapped

into this important resource; for example, the

National Education Goals included parental

involvement in children’s education as a top

priority. Clearly, teachers’ jobs are easier when
—5—

parents work with them rather than against them.

For this reason, parental support is an important

feature of teachers’ work environment.

The Definition of Teacher Quality

Used in This Report

The previous discussion underscores the complex

and sometimes controversial nature of defining

teacher quality. Two main elements were

discussed—teacher preparation and qualifications, and teaching practices. The definition used

in this report is based on the former rather than

the latter. Teachers’ professional preparation (as

well as their working conditions) has been

identified as fundamental to improving

elementary and secondary education (Carnegie

Forum on Education and the Economy, 1986;

Holmes Group, 1986; NCTAF, 1996).

Policymakers today are especially interested in

the training and education teachers receive in the

subject areas they teach; high-quality teacher

preparation and qualifications are expected to

lead to high-quality teaching. For these reasons, a

national profile of teacher preparation and

qualifications provides important information

about the quality of America’s teachers.

Decisions regarding how to define teacher quality

have implications for the method researchers use

to measure it. For example, teaching practices are

increasingly measured through classroom

observation. Teacher preparation and

qualifications are often measured through largescale surveys. The following section discusses

the various ways teacher quality has been

measured. Included is a discussion of the

definition(s) typically associated with each

measurement approach.

Teacher Quality:

How Has It Been Studied?

Just as definitions about teacher quality differ, so

do the ways in which it has been studied.

Conventional approaches to measuring teacher

quality have typically taken four forms: (1)

classroom observations of teacher practices; (2)

written examinations of teachers measuring their

basic literacy, subject-matter knowledge, and

pedagogical skills; (3) student performance and

achievement; and (4) large-scale surveys of

teacher qualifications, attitudes, behaviors, and

practices. It is important to note that studies of

teacher qualifications or practices are not always

driven by theories of what constitutes a good

teacher. Sometimes such indicators are

developed to answer specific policy questions.

As described below, different approaches to

measuring teacher qualifications or practices are

based on different conceptions of what it means

to be a high-quality teacher or on the specific

needs or interests of policymakers.

Classroom Observation

Observational research has a long and growing

history in the field of education. Classroom

observation, as well as the collection of artifacts

(e.g., teacher logs, homework) and information

from interviews, has been employed to document

teaching practices generally and to assess

teaching quality specifically. Observation, as

used by school systems for evaluation purposes,

has been strongly criticized as having the

following problems: limited competence of

principals, teacher resistance and apathy, lack of

uniformity within school systems, and inadequate

training of evaluators (Wise et al., 1984).

Principals often experience role conflict as they

try to serve as both evaluators and instructional

leaders, and they tend to lack expertise in

specialized subject-matter areas, especially at the

secondary school level (Stodolsky, 1984).

Using observational data to document teaching

practices is less controversial than using it to

assess individual teachers for purposes of salary

increase, tenure, or recertification. Observational

studies, often combined with interviews or

teacher logs, include investigations of teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge and reasoning

(Ball and Wilson, 1996) and the connections

between education policy and teacher practices

(Ball, 1990; Cohen, 1990; Peterson, 1990),

professional development and teaching (Ball,

1996), and subject matter and curricular activity

(Stodolsky and Grossman, 1995).

Observational data provide rich detail and indepth information. As such, observation is

typically used to provide a detailed picture of

classroom instruction in a limited number of

classrooms. Because collecting such data is
—6—

costly, this approach is rarely used to provide a

national profile of instruction. However, NCES

is involved in an effort to provide such a profile.

The Videotape Classroom Study, part of the Third

International Mathematics and Science Study

(TIMSS), consists of videotaped lessons in 231

eighth grade mathematics classrooms in the

United States, Germany, and Japan. The report of

the video study includes general findings

regarding international differences in how lessons

are structured and delivered, what kind of

mathematics is presented, and the kinds of

mathematical thinking in which students are

engaged (U.S. Department of Education, 1998a).

Teacher Testing

Standardized tests, such as the National Teacher

Examinations (NTE), have been used to measure

teachers’ basic knowledge and skills (e.g., basic

literacy, number skills, subject-matter knowledge

in particular areas). Teacher test scores have then

been linked to student test scores. Ferguson

(1990) found that teachers’ scores on a test of

basic literacy skills were significantly correlated

with their students’ test scores. Results are

typically used to determine whether to grant

temporary or permanent certification, and

occasionally for continuation of tenured teachers.

While most experts agree that having basic

subject knowledge is an important prerequisite to

effective teaching, critics maintain that it is not a

sufficient indication of the range of knowledge

and skills needed to instruct and manage groups

of children. They argue that this approach does

not provide a complete picture of teacher quality.

These tests only measure teachers’ basic

knowledge and not their pedagogical knowledge

or their teaching practice. In response,

organizations such as the Educational Testing

Service (ETS), the Interstate New Teacher

Assessment and Support Consortium, and the

National Board for Professional Teaching

Standards have undertaken efforts to develop new

systems of teacher assessment that feature

“standards-based assessments.” One example of

the new generation of teacher examinations is the

Professional Assessments for Beginning

Teachers, the PRAXIS series, currently being

developed by the Educational Testing Service as

a replacement for NTE. The PRAXIS series

consists of three types of assessments: (1) a

computerized test of basic literacy and numeracy

skills; (2) a paper-and-pencil test of subjectmatter knowledge and general pedagogical

principles; and (3) an observational assessment of

classroom teaching performance. The PRAXIS

series is meant to assess potential and practicing

teachers at different times during their training

and practice (e.g., admitting candidates into

teacher education programs and awarding initial

and ongoing certification). In addition, many

states have developed their own assessments as a

basic prerequisite for teaching. These

assessments can take the form of written tests,

which may measure basic skills, subject matter or

knowledge of teaching methods, and performance

evaluations, which could consist of portfolio

evaluation or classroom observation (CCSSO,

1998).

Such efforts have grown out of the recent push to

identify standards for teacher and student

performance. These kinds of assessments go

beyond paper-and-pencil tests to include portfolio

assessment and in-person testing, which

incorporate pedagogy, content knowledge, and

role-play/interactive sessions. Teachers may also

be required to submit examples of their work

through videotapes and lesson plans. Teachers

are asked to analyze teaching situations and

defend teaching decisions based on knowledge of

subject, students, curriculum, and pedagogy.

Student Achievement Tests

Many would argue that the bottom line of

whether teachers (and schools) are effective is

whether their students are successful. The use of

student achievement test score gains to assess

teachers, rather than educational systems,

however, has received substantial criticism (U.S.

Department of Education, 1996a). Specifically,

social scientists have argued that it is very

difficult to separate out the portion of student

achievement gains that can be reliably attributed

to an individual teacher. Numerous factors affect

student achievement over the course of a school

year in addition to his or her teacher: home

background, student personality, attendance,

school and community resources, and the peer

group have all been demonstrated to affect how

much students learn. In addition, critics have

argued that standardized achievement tests assess

minimum levels of student competence and are
—7—

often limited to the kinds of knowledge that can

be captured with multiple-choice formats.

Large-Scale Surveys

National surveys of teachers have been used to

provide quantifiable indicators of teacher quality.

Typically, teachers have been asked to provide

information on attributes such as their educational

background, major and minor fields of study,

certification, and professional development

experiences. Such indicators have sometimes

been linked to student test scores. For example,

Ferguson (1990) found that the students of

teachers with master’s degrees had higher test

scores in grades 1-7.

Over the years, there have been many efforts by

NCES and others to use large-survey

methodology to describe teaching—and, more

generally, to capture what happens in classrooms.

Examples of recent efforts can be found in School

Policies and Practices Affecting Instruction in

Mathematics (U.S. Department of Education,

1998b), America’s Teachers: Profile of a

Profession, 1993-1994 (U.S. Department of

Education, 1997), Toward Better Teaching

Professional Development in 1993-94 (U.S.

Department of Education, 1998c), and What

Happens in Classrooms? Elementary and

Secondary School Instruction, 1994-95 (U.S.

Department of Education, forthcoming). These

data notwithstanding, social scientists agree that

existing surveys on these topics leave room for

improvement. Important work continues in areas

such as curriculum content, but new tools must be

developed before large-scale differences in

instructional and classroom practices can be

reliably reported.

The Measurement Approach

Used in This Report

The qualities deemed relevant to effective

teaching, the goals of the assessor, and the

resources available all contribute to the choice of

assessment. The measurement approach adopted

in this report is a large-scale survey administered

to a representative sample of American teachers.

Such a survey is particularly appropriate for

providing a national profile of teacher

preparation, qualifications, professional development, and school and parental support. Providing

a picture of our nation’s teachers is important in

tracking trends of teacher preparedness and

professional experiences.

Because of constraints on teacher time and

resources, there are few national reports of this

kind. Instead, many national reports have

compiled data from a variety of sources to make

conclusions about the status of education in

America. Only the Schools and Staffing Survey

(SASS), conducted by NCES on a regular basis,

collects data from both teachers and schools on

numerous aspects of teacher quality. SASS

indicators of teacher quality include recruitment,

teacher preparation, induction programs, teaching

assignment (e.g., committee work, in- and out-offield teaching), resources (e.g., class size,

planning time), and professional development

opportunities. However, the last SASS was

conducted in 1993-94, and the next one will not

be fielded until 1999-2000. The need for up-todate, nationally representative data on the

nation’s teaching force prompted this Fast

Response Survey on Professional Development

and Training in 1998. In addition to presenting

current findings on teacher quality from the 1998

FRSS survey, this report draws comparisons

between the FRSS findings and findings from

comparable questions on NCES’ 1993-94 SASS.

The comparisons provide some information about

trends over the 4-year period. See appendix A for

a discussion of the comparisons between the

surveys. Both surveys are described in more

detail below.

1998 FRSS Survey. The Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training was

conducted through the NCES FRSS during spring

1998. FRSS is a survey system designed to

collect small amounts of issue-oriented data with

minimal burden on respondents and within a

relatively short timeframe. Questionnaires (see

appendix E) were mailed to a nationally

representative sample of 4,049 full-time teachers

in regular public elementary, middle, and high

schools in the 50 states and the District of

Columbia. The sample was designed to represent

full-time public school teachers in grades 1

through 12 whose main teaching assignment was

in English/language arts, social studies/social

sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or

science, or who taught a self-contained

classroom. Part-time, itinerant, and substitute
—8—

teachers were excluded, as were teachers whose

main teaching assignment was in another subject

area (e.g., art, special education). Data have been

weighted to national estimates. All comparative

statements made in this report have been tested

for statistical significance using chi-square tests

or t-tests adjusted for multiple comparisons using

the Bonferroni adjustment and are significant at

the 0.05 level or better. Appendix A provides a

detailed discussion of the sample and survey

methodology.1

1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey. Since

1987-88, NCES has periodically conducted the

SASS, an integrated survey of public and private

schools, school districts, principals, and teachers.

Most recently conducted in 1993-94, it provides a

comprehensive picture of the school workforce

and teacher supply and demand. Included on the

public school teacher survey are several items on

teacher training and professional development.

Some of the items are similar, although not

identical, to the items on the FRSS survey (see

appendix F). Data from the similar items on the

1993-94 SASS teacher survey were reanalyzed

for a subset of schools and teachers that are

approximately the same as the schools and

teachers sampled for the FRSS survey.2 Results

are incorporated into the discussion of the FRSS

data where appropriate.3 Because the SASS data

were reanalyzed in this way, the estimates that

appear in this report differ from SASS data

published in other National Center for Education

Statistics reports.

Organization of This Report

The preparation of high-quality teachers stems

from the many experiences and opportunities that

they face, both prior to and during their teaching

careers. For all teachers, learning begins before

entering their own classrooms. Among their

learning experiences is the formal postsecondary

 

1

Detailed tables for the FRSS survey are in appendix B. Tables of

standard errors for the text tables and figures are in appendix D.

2

 Public school teachers targeted in the 1993-94 SASS study for

comparison to the 1998 FRSS study are full-time public school

teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment

was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign

language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

3

Detailed tables for the SASS items are presented in appendix C.

training they undergo in order to become

educators. This includes college work and

certification. Once on the job, teachers have

many additional opportunities to learn—ranging

from the general learning that comes from years

of work experience to more structured

opportunities in the form of formal professional

development activities. Not surprisingly, teacher

learning and preparation are enhanced in

environments that support their learning and their

work. This discussion suggests one useful model

for thinking about teacher quality; it begins with

different types of teacher learning and ends with

the support teachers receive to pursue continued

learning.

Using this model of teacher quality, the results

sections of this report first address teacher

learning (both preservice and on the job), as well

as the working conditions to which teachers are

exposed; these sections then examine the extent

to which teachers feel themselves prepared to

meet the challenges they face in their classrooms.

The results of the 1998 survey and comparisons

between the 1998 and 1993-94 surveys are

divided into four chapters corresponding directly

to the four main topics investigated in this FRSS

report: (1) preservice learning and teaching

assignment; (2) continued learning; (3) supportive

work environment; and (4) teachers’ feelings of

preparedness. Conclusions are provided in the

final chapter of this report.
—9—

2. PRESERVICE LEARNING AND

TEACHING ASSIGNMENT

Teachers’ preservice learning and teaching

assignment are the first features of the teacher

quality model presented in this report. Aspects of

preservice learning and teaching assignment (e.g.,

completion of a teacher education program,

course work or earned degree(s) beyond the

baccalaureate, and possession of some kind of

certification or credential) have traditionally been

used to characterize teacher preparation and

qualifications. Preservice learning occurs prior to

entering the classroom.4 Teaching assignment is

investigated to determine the match (or lack

thereof) between teachers’ training and the main

subject areas that they are assigned to teach.

Growing concern that a number of the nation’s

teachers are underqualified to teach our children

has focused attention on the quality of their

preservice learning, and especially on the

institutions that prepare prospective teachers.

These institutions have been criticized for treating

the education programs as “cash cows which are

conducted on a shoestring and used to fund

programs in other fields” (NCTAF, 1997: 31).

Critics argue that schools of education should be

more “intellectually solid” and more connected to

elementary and secondary schools (Holmes

Group, 1986: 2). For example, colleges and

universities should improve the screening process

of teacher candidates to weed out weak students

(Holmes Group, 1986), and these prospective

teachers should be required to have academic

majors in the fields they will eventually teach

(Ravitch, 1998).

Criticisms have also been launched at

certification policies. Critics argue that setting

standards and not enforcing them has increased

the number of underqualified teachers in

American schools. These concerns were reflected

in a recent speech by Education Secretary

 

4

 Although characterized as preservice learning, it is important to

note that teachers may enhance or expand their education and

certification once on the job. For example, they may earn a

master’s degree once employed as classroom teachers.

Richard Riley to the National Press Club

(September 1998). In that speech, Secretary

Riley implored the nation’s colleges and

universities to do a better job of preparing

teachers and challenged every state to eliminate

emergency certification.

Finally, concern over underqualified teachers has

led to increased attention toward the problem of

out-of-field teaching. In order for teachers to

provide the highest quality learning experiences

for students, they must first understand and be

able to communicate the subject matter. The

number of students being taught by untrained and

unprepared teachers has triggered researchers,

practitioners, and others vested in education to

search for solutions. Most realize that

“knowledge of subject matter and of pedagogical

methods do not, of course, guarantee quality

teachers nor quality teaching, but they are

necessary prerequisites” (U.S. Department of

Education, 1996b: 2). The lack of continuity

between a teacher’s training and a teacher’s

assignment leaves students learning from teachers

that have not met those prerequisites.

Researchers have debated the reasons why

teachers are assigned to teach out of field. As

summarized by Ingersoll (1998), some believe

that there are not enough teachers who are

adequately trained in academic coursework.

Others propose that teacher unions force schools

to retain older, less competent teachers and to

subject new, more qualified teachers to cutbacks.

Finally, some researchers believe that shortages

in teacher supply force schools to hire teachers

with lower qualifications. Ingersoll proposes that

the low status and low pay teachers receive

contributes to high turnover rates. To deal with

the frequent vacancies, he argues, schools are

reduced to assigning teachers to out-of-field

classes (Ingersoll, 1998). These conditions may

also contribute to the number of teachers granted

emergency certification. This FRSS report

addresses the incidences of out-of-field teaching
—10—

and emergency certification, but does not seek

explanations for these phenomena.

This chapter addresses the following indicators of

preservice learning: education, certification, and

the match between teachers’ preparation and

teaching assignment—in-field versus out-of-field

teaching. Each of these issues is discussed in

more detail below.

Teacher Education

Teacher education is the first measure of

preservice learning addressed in this report. The

type of degree held by a teacher is one measure

used to determine teacher qualifications. Holding

at least a bachelor’s degree was once considered

adequate, but today teachers often are expected to

hold advanced degrees. As discussed earlier, this

expectation has been accompanied by a push for

teachers, particularly those teaching in secondary

schools, to have an academic major, rather than a

major in the study of education. In fact, since

1986 about 300 colleges have created extended

teacher education programs that enable students

to obtain both a bachelor’s degree in an academic

field and a master’s degree in education (DarlingHammond, 1998).

In 1998, virtually all full-time public school

teachers had a bachelor’s degree, nearly half

(45 percent) had a master's degree, and 1 percent

had a doctorate (table B-25). The likelihood of a

teacher having a master's degree varied somewhat

by the school instructional level and the number

of years of teaching experience (figure 1 and table

B-2). A higher percentage of teachers who taught

at the high school level had master's degrees

(55 percent) than did those teaching in middle

schools (46 percent) and those teaching in

elementary schools (40 percent). The likelihood

of holding a master’s degree increased with the

number of years of teaching experience. Thus,

teachers with 3 or fewer years of teaching

experience were the least likely to have a master's

degree (16 percent), compared with 31 percent of

teachers with 4 to 9 years of experience,

48 percent of teachers with 10 to 19 years of

experience, and 62 percent of those with 20 or

 

5

 Tables that begin with the prefix B are detailed tables from the

1998 FRSS study, which appear in appendix B.

more years of teaching experience.6 This is not

surprising, given that many states and districts

have long required that a teacher earn a master’s

degree or its equivalent within a specified period

of time.

Having a master’s degree also varied by the

concentration of poverty in the school (as defined

by the percentage of students eligible for free or

reduced-price lunch). Teachers in schools with

higher concentrations of poverty were generally

less likely to hold master's degrees than were

teachers in schools with low concentrations of

poverty (figure 1 and table B-2). For example,

37 percent of the teachers in the highest poverty

schools had master’s degrees compared with

57 percent in the lowest poverty schools. The

likelihood of having a master’s degree also varied

by geographic region, with 60 percent of teachers

in the Northeast and 51 percent of teachers in the

Midwest having master's degrees, compared with

38 percent in the West and 39 percent in the

South. These 1998 findings paralleled those from

1993-94,7 where similar patterns emerged

(figure 2 and table C-38).

Among the full-time public school teachers in the

1998 study, 38 percent had an undergraduate or

graduate major in an academic field, 18 percent

had a major in subject area education (i.e., the

teaching of an academic field, such as

mathematics education), 37 percent had a major

in general education, and 7 percent had a major in

other education fields (e.g., special education,

curriculum and instruction, or educational

 

6

The teachers in 1998 averaged 15 years of total teaching

experience, and 10 years as a teacher in their current school (table

B-3). In general, the teaching profession includes a greater

percentage of highly experienced teachers than novice teachers; 39

percent of the teachers had been teaching for 20 or more years,

while 14 percent had been teaching for 3 or fewer years (table B1). About one-quarter of the teachers had 4 to 9 years or 10 to 19

years of teaching experience (22 and 25 percent, respectively).

Findings from 1993-94 indicate that the percentage of teachers

reporting various years of experience in the field has remained

essentially unchanged (tables C-1 and C-2).

7

 Data from similar items on the 1993-94 SASS teacher survey were

reanalyzed for a subset of schools and teachers that is

approximately the same as the schools and teachers sampled for

the 1998 FRSS survey. Results are incorporated into this report

where appropriate. See appendix A for a discussion of the

comparisons between these two surveys.

8

 Tables that begin with the prefix C are detailed tables from the

1993-94 SASS study, which appear in appendix C.
—11—

Figure 1.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold a master’s degree, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998

40

46

55

49

16

31

48

62

57

46

41

37

60

51

39 38

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Elementary 

school

Middle

school

High

school

CombinedLess

than

15

percent

15 

to

32

percent

33 

to 

59

percent

60

percent

or 

more

3 or

fewer

years

4 to 

9 

years

10 

to 19

years

20 

or 

more

years

Northeast

MidwestSouth West

School instructional level Percent of students eligible for 

free or reduced-price lunch Teaching experience Region

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

administration; table 1). For these analyses,

each teacher was only counted once, even if he

or she had more than one major or more than

one degree. Major fields of study were selected

in the order of academic field, subject area

education, other education, and general

education. See appendix A for a more detailed

discussion of how this measure was calculated

and tables that show duplicated majors.

The percentages with majors in various fields

varied by the instructional level of the school

and years of teaching experience. While 58

percent of elementary school teachers majored

in general education, 27 percent of middle

school teachers and only 5 percent of high

school teachers had general education majors.

More high school teachers had an undergraduate

or graduate major in an academic field (66

percent), compared with elementary school

teachers (22 percent) and middle school teachers

(44 percent). In addition, more high school and

middle school teachers majored in subject area

education (29 and 22 percent, respectively) than

did elementary school teachers (9 percent). The

newest teachers (i.e., those with 3 or fewer years of

teaching experience) were more likely to have

majored in an academic field than were any of the

more experienced teachers. Thus, half of the

teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience had

majored in an academic field, compared with 32 to

41 percent of the more experienced teachers,

perhaps reflecting the recent emphasis in teacher

education on majoring in an academic field rather

than in education. The 1993-94 data showed the

same patterns for instructional level (table 2). That

is, most middle and high school teachers majored

in an academic field or subject area education,
—12—

Figure 2.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold a master’s degree, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

42

46

55

47

15

30

49

61

53

46

41 41

60

47

42

37

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent

Elementary 

school

Middle

school

High

school

CombinedLess

than

15

percent

15 

to

32

percent

33 

to 

59

percent

60

percent

or 

more

3 or

fewer

years

4 to 

9 

years

10 

to 19

years

20 

or 

more

years

NortheastMidwestSouth West

School instructional level Percent of students eligible for 

free or reduced-price lunch Teaching experience Region

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

Table 1.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who majored in various fields of study for a

bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 38 18 37 7

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 22 9 58 11

Middle school..................................................................................... 44 22 27 7

High school ........................................................................................ 66 29 5 1

Combined........................................................................................... 55 35 8 2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 50 11 37 2

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 41 16 39 5

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 32 20 37 11

20 or more years................................................................................. 36 20 36 8

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Major fields of study were selected in the order of

academic field, subject area education, other education, and general education.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
—13—

Table 2.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who majored in various fields of study for a

bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 39 21 34 7

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 24 14 52 10

Middle school..................................................................................... 44 26 24 6

High school ........................................................................................ 67 30 3 1

Combined........................................................................................... 55 32 11 2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 46 17 35 2

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 38 19 38 5

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 35 21 34 9

20 or more years................................................................................. 40 23 31 7

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Major fields of study were selected in the order of

academic field, subject area education, other education, and general education.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

and most elementary school teachers majored in

general education.9

Teacher Certification

Teachers’ certification status, the second measure

of preservice learning examined in this report, is

also an indication of teachers’ qualifications. In

addition to requirements for formal education

(e.g., a bachelor’s degree), teacher certification

includes clinical experiences (e.g., student

teaching) and often some type of formal testing.

Most of the full-time public school teachers in

1998 were fully certified in the field of their main

teaching assignment; that is, they had either a

regular or standard state certificate, or an

advanced professional certificate in the field in

which they taught most often. Among teachers in

general elementary classrooms,10 93 percent had a

regular or advanced certificate, 3 percent had a

provisional certificate, 2 percent a probationary

 

9

 There is some evidence from SASS reinterview studies that

teachers’ recollections of their major field are moderately

inconsistent with their SASS questionnaire data. Thus, these data

should be interpreted with caution.

10 The category labeled general elementary classrooms in the 1998

FRSS study includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms,

regardless of instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the

self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

certificate, 1 percent a temporary certificate, and

1 percent had an emergency certificate or waiver

(tables 3 and B-4). No general elementary

classroom teachers in this study indicated that

they were teaching without any kind of

certification. Most departmentalized teachers

also were fully certified in their main teaching

assignment field; 92 percent indicated that they

had a regular or advanced certificate in the field

in which they taught the most courses (tables 3

and B-5). For the main teaching assignment,

4 percent of the departmentalized teachers had a

provisional certificate, 2 percent had a probationary certificate, 1 percent had a temporary

certificate, and 1 percent had an emergency

certificate or waiver. Less than 0.5 percent of the

departmentalized teachers in this study indicated

that they were teaching in their main assignment

field without any kind of certification. These

findings on teachers' certification status

essentially replicated those of the 1993-94 study

(tables 4, C-4 and C-5).11

 

11 These data for both 1998 and 1993-94 may actually slightly

overestimate the amount of underqualified teaching, as measured

by possession of a regular teaching certificate in the main

assignment field, because some teachers who do not have regular

certificates in their main assignment field do have regular

certificates in another field.
—14—

Table 3.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state: 1998

Teaching assignment

Type of teaching certificate General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized settings:

main teaching assignment

Regular or standard state certificate, or advanced professional certificate... 93 92

Provisional or other type of certificate given while participating in an

“alternative certification program”.......................................................... 3 4

Probationary certificate................................................................................ 2 2

Temporary certificate .................................................................................. 1 1

Emergency certificate or waiver.................................................................. 1 1

No certificate ............................................................................................... 0 *

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of

instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Percents are computed down each column, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Zeros indicate that no teacher in the sample

gave the indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Table 4.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state: 1993-94

Teaching assignment

Type of teaching certificate General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized settings:

main teaching assignment2

Regular or standard state certificate, or advanced professional certificate... 94 90

Provisional or other type of certificate given while participating in an

“alternative certification program”.......................................................... 2 2

Probationary certificate................................................................................ 2 2

Temporary certificate .................................................................................. 1 1

Emergency certificate or waiver.................................................................. * *

No certificate ............................................................................................... 1 4

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was general elementary.

2The category labeled departmentalized settings includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment

was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

NOTE: Percents are computed down each column, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

Data from both the 1998 and 1993-94 studies

indicated that possessing a regular, standard, or

advanced certificate was positively related to

years of teaching experience. Almost all teachers

in both studies who had been teaching for 10 or

more years, whether in general elementary

classrooms or in departmentalized settings, were

fully certified in their main teaching assignment,

and most of the teachers who had been teaching 4

to 9 years were also fully certified (figures 3 and

4, and tables B-2, B-4, C-4, and C-5). Teachers

with 3 or fewer years of experience teaching in

both general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings, however, were much

less likely to have a regular, standard, or

advanced certificate than were more experienced

teachers. Since some states require new teachers

to start with probationary certification, all new

teachers without regular certification are not

necessarily less well qualified than those with

regular certification. In 1998, most teachers with

3 or fewer years of experience who did not have

regular certification had provisional or

probationary certification (tables B-4 and B-5).

However, emergency and temporary certification

was higher among teachers with 3 or fewer years
—15—

Figure 3.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings with a regular or standard state certificate or advanced

professional certificate, by teaching experience: 1998

65 64

92 89

99 97 99 99

0

20

40

60

80

100

General elementary 

classrooms

Departmentalized setting: 

Main teaching assignment

Percent

3 or fewer years

4 to 9 years

10 to 19 years

20 or more years

1

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of

instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Figure 4.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings with a regular or standard state certificate or advanced

professional certificate, by teaching experience: 1993-94

73

66

92

86

97

94

99

96

0

20

40

60

80

100

Self-contained classrooms Departmentalized setting: 

Main teaching assignment

Percent

3 or fewer years

4 to 9 years

10 to 19 years

20 or more years

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was general elementary.

2The category labeled departmentalized settings includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment

was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
—16—

of experience compared to teachers with more

teaching experience. For example, in 1998, 12

percent of general elementary classroom teachers

with 3 or fewer years of experience had

emergency or temporary certification, whereas

less than 1 percent of general elementary

classroom teachers with 10 or more years of

experience had emergency or temporary

certification (not shown in tables). The results

are similar for departmentalized teachers.

Teaching Assignment:

In-Field Teaching

The final measure of teacher preparation and

qualifications addressed in this chapter is teaching

assignment. Specifically, the FRSS survey

measured the match between teachers’ training

and teaching assignment in the main assignment

field—in-field versus out-of-field teaching.

According to Ingersoll (U.S. Department of

Education, 1996b), one of the least recognized

causes of underqualified teachers is the problem

of out-of-field teaching: teachers being assigned

to teach subjects that do not match their training

or education. Findings from Ingersoll’s analysis

of the 1990-91 Schools and Staffing Survey

showed that nearly a third of all high school math

teachers had neither a major nor a minor in

mathematics or mathematics education. In

addition, almost a quarter of all high school

English teachers had neither a major nor a minor

in English, literature, communications, speech,

journalism, English education, or reading

education (U.S. Department of Education,

1996c). Thus, as Ingersoll concludes, a large

percentage of high school students were taught by

teachers without basic qualifications in the

subjects they taught (Ingersoll, 1998).

The 1998 survey and the 1993-94 survey

provided data on teaching assignment and teacher

education. Calculated the same way for both sets

of data, a measure of in-field teaching was

constructed to compare the fields in which fulltime public school teachers had undergraduate

and graduate majors and minors with the fields in

which they had their main teaching assignments

(i.e., the field in which they reported that they

taught the most courses).12 This measure was

constructed for any teacher who taught

English/language arts, foreign language, social

studies/social science, mathematics, or science in

a departmentalized setting in any of grades 7

through 12. Results are presented separately for

grades 7 through 12 and grades 9 through 12,

since there are different definitions of what

constitutes secondary schooling. Because the

questionnaire collected information about degrees

and teaching assignments at the aggregated field

level (i.e., whether a teacher had degrees or

taught courses in science, rather than in chemistry

or physics), the in-field teaching measure is also

constructed at this level of aggregation. Teachers

were defined as teaching in field if they had an

undergraduate or graduate major or minor in the

field of their main teaching assignment. It is

important to note that teachers may become

qualified to teach a subject in ways that are not

measured by college majors and minors. A

teacher may take substantial coursework in a field

without having an actual major or minor in the

field.13 Details of how the measure of in-field

teaching was constructed are provided in

appendix A.

The measure of in-field teaching that is presented

here differs from some of the other measures

frequently seen in publications on this subject.

Measures usually focus on out-of-field teaching

as a measure of the mismatch between teacher

assignment and teacher education. For example,

Ingersoll (U.S. Department of Education, 1996a)

defined an out-of-field teacher as a teacher

teaching one or more mathematics, science, social

studies, or English classes without at least an

undergraduate or graduate-level major or minor in

the particular subject. Another approach to

studying out-of-field teaching is to examine the

proportion of students being taught by out-of-

 

12 A major or minor was considered in field if it was in either the

academic field (e.g., mathematics) or subject area education (e.g.,

mathematics education) that matched the main teaching

assignment.

13For example, in Pennsylvania, they award a “Master’s Degree

Equivalency Certificate” that is not the same as an “earned

master’s degree” (their wording), but is issued to qualify the holder

for salary increments provided by law. It requires 36 graduate

semester credits, at least half of which must be earned in the

content area of the primary teaching assignment. This is as much

coursework as may be required for a minor in a content area, yet

this coursework will not show up as a major or minor under earned

degrees, since the certificate is not considered a degree.
—17—

Table 5.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment field,

by selected school characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social

studies/

social

science

Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1................... 86 96 89 82 88

Locale

Central city............................................................. 82 99 85 81 79

Urban fringe/town/rural.......................................... 88 96 90 83 91

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less.................................................... 87 96 90 84 90

More than 50 percent.............................................. 83 # 86 76 81

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent............................................... 89 96 89 86 90

60 percent or more.................................................. 76 # 86 69 83

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

field teachers. In this case, Ingersoll (U.S.

Department of Education, 1996b) examined the

percentage of public secondary school students

enrolled in 1990-91 in classes taught by teachers

without at least a college minor in the field. In

contrast, the measure presented here looks at the

main teaching assignments of teachers (i.e., the

field in which they taught the most courses).

Because FRSS questionnaires are short and

designed for quick response, information was not

collected at a detailed level about all the courses

taught. In addition, the relatively small sample

size of the FRSS survey precludes examination of

in-field teaching for the secondary teaching

assignment, because too few teachers in the

sample had a secondary teaching assignment to

conduct these analyses.

While examination of in-field teaching in the

main teaching assignment gives a general

indication of the magnitude of the match between

teachers’ training and teaching assignment, it

does not provide the entire picture, and

understates the magnitude of the problem. For

example, Bobbitt and McMillen (U.S.

Department of Education, 1994b) found that if the

focus was restricted to main assignment field

contrasted against teachers’ college major or

minor and certification status, then almost all

teachers were qualified to teach in their main

assignment field. However, if the focus was

changed to include all the classes taught by each

teacher, then many fewer teachers were fully

qualified to teach in each class subject they were

assigned to teach during the day. Thus, it is

important to remember when reading the results

presented below that the total magnitude of the

mismatch between teacher assignment and

teacher education is greater than that shown by

the results for the main teaching assignment only.

In-Field Teaching Among Teachers in

Grades 7 through 12

The percent of 1998 full-time public school

teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or

minor in their main teaching assignment field

ranged from 82 percent of mathematics teachers

to 96 percent of foreign language teachers (tables

5 and B-7). Comparable data from 1993-94

showed a somewhat similar distribution. The

percent of the 1993-94 teachers in grades 7

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field ranged from 77 percent of
—18—

Table 6.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment field,

by selected school characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social

studies/

social

science

Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1................... 78 93 87 77 82

Locale

Central city............................................................. 78 96 89 76 83

Urban fringe/town/rural.......................................... 78 92 86 77 82

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less.................................................... 79 93 87 78 83

More than 50 percent.............................................. 74 96 88 71 77

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent............................................... 79 93 88 78 83

60 percent or more.................................................. 70 95 81 70 75

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

mathematics teachers to 93 percent of the foreign

language teachers (tables 6 and C-7). In-field

teaching for the main teaching assignment in

grades 7 through 12 was higher in the 1998 study

than in the 1993-94 study for English and science.

A key issue in the literature on equity concerns in

educational quality is the extent to which infield/out-of-field teaching varies by certain school

characteristics. Research has found that schools

with factors such as a high concentration of

poverty or location in an urban or central city area

are more likely than more affluent or suburban

schools to have higher rates of out-of-fieldteaching (U.S. Department of Education, 1996b).

The 1998 and 1993-94 data showed some

variations in the amount of in-field teaching in the

main assignment field by these characteristics.

The data in tables 5 and 6 are presented

differently than in other tables to allow

comparisons among schools by characteristics

often targeted in equity research.

In 1998, differences by poverty concentration or

percent minority enrollment in the school in the

prevalence of in-field teaching for main

assignment field were not statistically significant

for teachers in grades 7 through 12 (tables 5 and

B-7). In-field teaching in science differed by

school locale for the 1998 teachers. Science

teachers were somewhat less likely to be teaching

in field in their main assignment field in schools

located in central cities than in schools located in

urban fringe, town, or rural areas. The 1993-94

data found that English/language arts teachers

were less likely to be teaching in field for their

main assignment field in schools with the highest

concentration of poverty (as defined by 60

percent or more of students eligible for free or

reduced-price lunch) than were English teachers

in schools where less than 60 percent of the

students were eligible for free or reduced-price

lunch (tables 6 and C-7). No significant

differences were found by locale or percent

minority enrollment in the school for 1993-94

teachers in grades 7 through 12.14

 

14 Because of the large standard errors surrounding the estimates of

in-field teaching broken out by school characteristics (because of

the small number of teachers in each category in the 1998 survey),

differences that may appear large may not be statistically

significant. In contrast, the sample of teachers in the 1993-94

survey is much larger than it is in the 1998 survey, the standard

errors surrounding the 1993-94 estimates are smaller, and,

therefore, smaller differences by school characteristics will be

statistically significant for the 1993-94 teachers.
—19—

Table 7.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment field,

by selected school characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social

studies/

social

science

Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1................... 96 96 96 90 94

Locale

Central city............................................................. 94 100 96 88 90

Urban fringe/town/rural.......................................... 97 95 96 90 96

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less.................................................... 97 96 96 92 95

More than 50 percent.............................................. 94 # 97 82 92

Percent of public school students in school eligible

for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent............................................... 96 96 96 91 94

60 percent or more.................................................. 93 # # 81 #

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

In-Field Teaching Among Teachers

in Grades 9 through 12

In-field teaching was also examined separately

for teachers in grades 9 through 12, since there

are different definitions of what constitutes

secondary schooling. The percent of 1998 fulltime public school teachers in grades 9 through

12 who reported having a major or minor in their

main teaching assignment fields was 90 percent

for mathematics teachers, 94 percent for science

teachers, and 96 percent for teachers of

English/language arts, foreign language, and

social studies/social science (tables 7 and B-8).

Comparable 1993-94 data showed a somewhat

similar distribution. The percent of 1993-94

teachers who reported having a major or minor in

their main teaching assignment fields ranged from

87 percent of mathematics teachers to 93 percent

of the foreign language teachers (tables 8 and

C-8). In-field teaching for the main assignment

field in grades 9 through 12 was higher in the

1998 study than in the 1993-94 study for English,

social studies, and science. In addition, for both

1998 and 1993-94, the percent of teachers who

reported having an undergraduate or graduate

major or minor in their main teaching assignment

field was significantly lower for teachers of

grades 7 through 12 than for teachers of grades 9

through 12 for mathematics, science, English/

language arts, and social studies/social sciences,

indicating that teachers in grades 7 and 8 are less

likely to be teaching in field than are teachers in

grades 9 through 12.

Differences by poverty concentration, locale, or

percent minority enrollment in the school in the

prevalence of in-field teaching for main teaching

assignment were not statistically significant for

1998 teachers in grades through 9 through 12.

Mathematics teachers in 1993-94 were less likely

to be teaching in field in their main assignment

area in schools with the highest minority

enrollment. No significant differences were

found by locale or poverty concentration in the

school for 1993-94 teachers in grades 9 through

12.
—20—

Table 8.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment field,

by selected school characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social

studies/

social

science

Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1................... 88 93 92 87 90

Locale

Central city............................................................. 86 96 94 84 90

Urban fringe/town/rural.......................................... 88 93 91 87 90

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less.................................................... 88 93 91 88 90

More than 50 percent.............................................. 87 95 94 80 87

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent............................................... 87 93 92 87 90

60 percent or more.................................................. 89 95 90 83 91

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

Summary

This chapter on preservice learning and teaching

assignment began with a description of the

concerns and critiques of the current training

received by prospective teachers. Criticisms

focused on three features of their training and

placement—teachers’ education, certification,

and teaching assignment. In many ways, this

report does not address the heart of these

critiques—the quality of the teacher education

programs that train teachers. This report is about

teachers, not the programs and institutions that

train them. However, this study did investigate

three basic concerns that have received growing

attention—that teachers do not have academic

majors, that many teachers may not be fully

certified, and that a large number of educators are

teaching subjects for which they have not

received training.

The 1998 study found that 38 percent of the

teachers had an undergraduate or graduate major

in an academic field. Among high school

teachers, however, the percentages were much

higher, with two-thirds of high school teachers

having majored in an academic field. However,

only 22 percent of elementary school teachers had

majored in an academic field. These findings

paralleled those from 1993-94, where the same

patterns emerged. In addition, the 1998 and

1993-94 studies indicated that most teachers were

fully certified (with a regular or standard state

certificate, or an advanced professional

certificate) in the field of their main teaching

assignment. Not surprisingly, however, results of

the 1998 and 1993-94 surveys indicated that new

teachers were less likely than more experienced

teachers to have regular certification.

Results of the 1998 survey suggest that teachers

possess many of the basic prerequisites for

teaching—advanced degrees and the appropriate

certification and education. Most teachers in

grades 7 through 12 have a major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field. As

suggested earlier, teaching is complex, and the

demands continue to change and grow. Meeting

these challenges requires teachers to be lifelong

learners. Much of their learning, after initial

preservice training, takes place on the job. This

type of learning is the focus of the next chapter of

this report.
—21—

3. CONTINUED LEARNING

Teachers’ continued learning is the second feature

of teacher preparation and qualifications

addressed in this report. Continued learning is

particularly important because the nation’s

schools have been increasingly challenged by

policy initiatives to “do better, and to do

differently” (McLaughlin and Oberman 1996: iv).

At the core of educational reforms to raise

standards, reshape curricula, and restructure the

way schools operate is the call to reconceptualize

the practice of teaching (Darling-Hammond and

McLaughlin, 1996). American children need a

broader range of skills, including higher order

thinking skills and technological expertise.

Teachers must learn to teach students in ways that

promote such skills. At the same time, teachers

face the greater challenges of rapidly increasing

technological changes, greater diversity in the

classroom, and a push to teach in innovative ways

(often different from how they were taught and/or

from the formal preservice training they

received).

In order to meet the changing demands of their

jobs, high-quality teachers must be capable and

willing to continually learn and relearn their

trade. This learning begins prior to entering the

classroom (as discussed in the previous section).

However, beginning teachers are often not fully

prepared for the requirements of classroom

teaching (Fullan with Stiegelbauer, 1991).

Continued learning, the second aspect of teacher

preparation and qualifications addressed in this

report, is key to building educators’ capacity for

effective teaching, particularly in a profession

where the demands are changing and expanding.

Continued learning takes multiple forms; the two

key forms discussed here are formal professional

development and collaboration with other

teachers.

Formal Professional

Development

The first aspect of continued learning, formal

professional development, is included in the

National Education Goals; Goal 4 states: “By the

year 2000, the nation’s teaching force will have

access to programs for the continued

improvement of their professional skills and the

opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills

needed to instruct and prepare all American

students for the next century.” The inclusion of a

national goal for teacher professional development represents an increased focus on

professional development as an important vehicle

for school reform and educational excellence

(Sprinthall, Reiman, and Theis-Sprinthall, 1996).

Some schools and school districts require teachers

to participate, and certain states have passed

initiatives encouraging or mandating certain types

of professional development. In addition, some

teachers actively seek their own opportunities for

professional development. For example, college

coursework completed after a teacher has started

teaching is one form of professional development.

However, access to professional development

activities may vary widely among teachers; for

example, there may be more opportunities for

participation in districts located in close

proximity to a university or college.

Formal professional development typically

consists of school and district “staffdevelopment” programs. Teachers often attend

classes sponsored by their districts and attend

workshops, conferences, and summer institutes.

Workshops and conferences are the most typical

form of continuing professional development.

They are usually designed to meet short-term

goals of implementing specific instructional

change, such as the integration of technology into

classroom teaching.

However, these traditional approaches to

professional development (e.g., workshops,

conferences) have been criticized for being

relatively ineffective because they are usually

short term; they lack continuity through adequate

followup and ongoing feedback from experts;

they are typically isolated from the participants’

classroom and school contexts; and they take a

passive approach to training teachers, allowing

little opportunity to learn by doing and reflecting
—22—

with colleagues. A core argument is that unless

professional development programs are carefully

designed and implemented to provide continuity

between what teachers learn and what goes on in

their classrooms and schools, these activities are

not likely to produce any long-lasting effects on

either teacher competence or student outcomes

(Fullan with Stiegelbauer, 1991). In other words,

as traditionally practiced, professional development activities may lack connection to the

challenges teachers face in their classrooms.

In order to investigate such issues, the 1998

survey elicited information from teachers

regarding their recent participation in professional

development programs in each of eight content

areas (see figure 5). Because of changes in

technology, in the notions of effective teaching,

and in the types of students and students’ needs

teachers encounter in their classrooms, the survey

elicited information regarding teachers’ formal

professional development in such areas as

technology, new methods of teaching, state or

district curriculum or performance standards, and

accommodating students with disabilities or from

diverse linguistic or cultural backgrounds.

Because there is a good deal of skepticism

regarding the value of formal professional

development for teachers’ work, the survey also

requested information regarding the extent to

which teachers’ felt that these opportunities

improved their teaching. Moreover, because

limited exposure is one of the criticisms launched

at traditional forms of professional development,

the survey also asked teachers to indicate the

duration of their exposure to different

professional development opportunities (i.e., time

spent on particular activities). The data indicate

that teacher participation in professional

development in 1998 was high: almost all of the

teachers surveyed in 1998 (99 percent) had

participated in professional development

programs in at least one of the listed content areas

in the last 12 months (not shown in tables).

Teachers in the 1993-94 survey were also asked

about their participation in professional

development programs in the past 12 months.

However, the survey covered five content areas:

methods of teaching their subject field, student

assessment, cooperative learning in the

classroom, uses of education technology for

instruction, and in-depth study in their subject

field (see figure 6). The data also indicate that an

overwhelming majority of teachers (90 percent)

participated in professional development

activities during 1993-94 (not shown in tables).

Content of Professional Development

In 1998, teachers were more likely to have

participated in professional development

activities that appear consistent with the emphasis

of education reform to do things differently and

better (figure 5). Teachers were more likely to

have participated in implementing state or district

curriculum and performance standards

(81 percent), integrating educational technology

into the grade or subject taught (78 percent),

implementing new teaching methods (77 percent),

doing in-depth study in the subject area of their

main teaching assignment (73 percent), and using

student performance assessment techniques

(67 percent) than in other areas. About half had

participated in professional development in

classroom management and addressing the needs

of students with disabilities. One exception to

this pattern is participation in professional

development programs that addressed the needs

of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds; teachers were

least likely to have participated in these activities

(31 percent).

In 1993-94, teachers were most likely to have

recent professional development that appears to

emphasize pedagogical skills; 67 percent of

teachers had professional development on

methods of teaching in their subject field (figure

6). Fewer teachers had any recent professional

development in student assessment (55 percent),

cooperative learning (53 percent), and uses of

educational technology for instruction

(51 percent). Teachers were least likely to

participate in in-depth study in their subject field

(29 percent).

In addition to other issues, addressing the needs

of students with limited English proficiency or

from culturally diverse backgrounds has recently

become a central concern mainly because of

growing student populations with these

backgrounds. Therefore, teacher training to meet

these needs might be particularly important to

schools with large minority student populations.

In 1998, teacher participation in professional
—23—

Figure 5.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional development

activities in the last 12 months that focused on various topics: 1998

81 78 77 73

67

49 48

31

0

20

40

60

80

100

State or 

district

curriculum 

and 

performance

standards

Integration of

educational

technology in

the grade or

subject you

teach

New 

methods 

of teaching

(e.g.,

cooperative

learning)

In-depth

study in the

subject area

of your main

teaching

assignment

Student

performance

assessment

Classroom

management,

including

student

discipline

Addressing 

the needs of

students with

disabilities

Addressing

the needs of

students with

limited

English

proficiency or

from diverse

cultural

backgrounds

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Figure 6.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional development

activities since the end of the last school year that focused on various topics: 1993-94

67

55 53 51

29

0

20

40

60

80

100

Methods of

teaching your

subject field

Student 

assessment

Cooperative 

learning in the

classroom

Uses of 

educational 

technology for 

instruction

In-depth study 

in your subject

field

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
—24—

Figure 7.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional development

activities in the last 12 months that addressed the needs of students with limited English

proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds, by percent minority enrollment in

the school: 1998

14

29

34

51

0

20

40

60

80

100

5 percent or less 6 to 20 percent 21 to 50 percent More than 50

percent

Percent minority enrollment in the school

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

development programs that focused on limited

English proficient or culturally diverse students

generally increased with the percent minority

enrollment in the school (figure 7). For example,

teachers from schools with more than 50 percent

minority enrollment were much more likely than

those who taught in schools with 5 percent or less

minority enrollment to participate in professional

development programs on this topic (51 versus 14

percent).

Participation in professional development in

programs that addressed the needs of limited

English proficient and culturally diverse students

also varied by region (figure 8). For example,

teachers in the West were far more likely than

teachers in the South to have had training in this

content area (51 versus 33 percent). Further,

teachers in the South were more likely to

participate in these programs than those in the

Midwest or Northeast.

Professional Development and

Teaching Experience

In an era of education reform, continuing

professional development is equally relevant for

both new and experienced teachers as many

aspects of teaching may be changing. Teacher

participation in professional development may be

influenced by several factors: personal

motivation, school or district requirement, and

state initiatives requiring or encouraging certain

types of professional development. Moreover,

while certain kinds of on-the-job training, such as

classroom management and curriculum

development, may be more relevant to the needs

of new teachers than experienced teachers, those

who have taught for many years may have a

greater need to upgrade their skills in the use of

educational technology. It is, therefore, useful to

examine whether teaching experience makes a

difference to participation in professional

development in various content areas.

The data suggest that teaching experience makes

little difference to teacher participation in

professional development in most of the content

areas. One area in which teaching experience

was, however, clearly related to teacher

participation in professional development was

classroom management, including student

discipline. The likelihood of participating in

professional development programs that focused

on classroom management generally decreased
—25—

Figure 8.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional development

activities in the last 12 months that addressed the needs of students with limited English

proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds, by region: 1998

22 22

33

51

0

20

40

60

80

100

Northeast Midwest South West

Region

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Table 9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional development

activities in the last 12 months in various content areas, by teaching experience: 1998

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

State or district curriculum and performance standards......................... 78 84 84 80

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach 72 79 79 79

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning) ........................... 82 79 78 73

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment .... 77 78 74 67

Student performance assessment............................................................ 66 72 69 64

Classroom management, including student discipline............................ 65 53 46 43

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities ................................. 49 47 50 46

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds..................................................... 36 34 36 25

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

with years of teaching experience (table 9). For

example, in 1998, teachers with 3 or fewer years

experience were more likely than more

experienced teachers to participate in such a

program, and those with 4 to 9 years experience

were more likely to do so than those who taught

for 10 or more years.

In some other areas, teacher participation in

professional development differed between the

least experienced teachers and those who were

very experienced (table 9). For example, in 1998,

teachers with 3 or fewer years of experience were

more likely than those who had taught for 20 or

more years to participate in programs that

addressed new methods of teaching (82 versus 73

percent). Newer teachers were also more likely

than very experienced teachers to have

participated in professional development on indepth study in the subject area of the main

teaching assignment (77 versus 67 percent).

Moreover, most experienced teachers (20 or more
—26—

Table 10.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities since the end of the school year in various content areas, by

teaching experience: 1993-94

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

Methods of teaching your subject field.................................................. 68 73 69 62

Student assessment ................................................................................ 56 57 55 53

Cooperative learning in the classroom................................................... 53 53 54 52

Uses of educational technology for instruction...................................... 46 53 53 51

In-depth study in your subject field ....................................................... 27 30 30 27

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

Table 11.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the number of hours spent in

professional development activities in the last 12 months in various content areas: 1998

Total hours spent* Content area

1 to 8 More than 8

State or district curriculum and performance standards............................................................................... 61 39

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach...................................................... 62 38

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)................................................................................. 61 39

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment .......................................................... 44 56

Student performance assessment ................................................................................................................. 71 29

Classroom management, including student discipline ................................................................................. 78 22

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities....................................................................................... 81 19

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds.. 70 30

*Percents are based on those who participated in professional development activities in a particular content area.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

years) were less likely than all others to

participate in professional development

addressing the needs of limited English proficient

or culturally diverse students. The 1993-94 data

on participation in professional development

about teaching methods in the teachers’ subject

field also showed a difference between the least

and most experienced teachers (68 versus

62 percent, table 10).

Intensity of Professional

Development Activities

A major criticism of professional development

programs is the lack of intensity and followup in

traditional staff development programs such as

workshops and seminars. The core issue is that

these programs are typically too short term to

allow for meaningful change in teaching

performance.

The 1998 data indicate that participation in

professional development programs typically

lasted from 1 to 8 hours, or the equivalent of 1

day or less of training (tables 11 and B-9). The

content area for which teachers were most likely

to spend more than a day of professional

development was in-depth study in the subject

area of the main teaching assignment (table 11).

However, although teachers typically need

extended time to pursue research on in-depth

studies, slightly more than half of teachers spent

more than a day in professional training in this

content area (56 percent). The areas in which

teachers were least likely to spend more than a

day of training were addressing the needs of

students with disabilities (19 percent) and

classroom management (22 percent).
—27—

Table 12.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the number of hours spent in

professional development activities since the end of the last school year in various

content areas: 1993-94

Total hours spent*

Content area

1 to 8 More than 8

Methods of teaching your subject field........................................................................................................ 57 43

Student assessment ...................................................................................................................................... 78 22

Cooperative learning in the classroom......................................................................................................... 73 27

Uses of educational technology for instruction............................................................................................ 70 30

In-depth study in your subject field ............................................................................................................. 49 51

*Percents are based on those who participated in professional development activities in a particular content area.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

Table 13.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they believe

the activity improved their teaching: 1998

Improved classroom teaching Content area

A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

State or district curriculum and performance standards......................... 12 36 39 13

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach 21 38 34 6

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning) ........................... 22 42 31 4

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment .... 28 44 26 2

Student performance assessment............................................................ 17 39 38 6

Classroom management, including student discipline............................ 19 39 35 7

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities ................................. 14 36 44 6

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds..................................................... 18 34 40 9

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Teacher participation in professional development

in 1993-94 was also likely to be short term,

typically lasting from 1 to 8 hours (tables 12 and

C-9). Moreover, the content area for which

teachers were most likely to spend more than a

day of training was in-depth study in the subject

area of the main teaching assignment. Teachers

were least likely to spend more than a day of

professional development on student assessment

(22 percent), cooperative learning in the

classroom (27 percent), and uses of educational

technology for instruction (30 percent).

Perceived Impact of

Professional Development

Since the rationale behind professional programs

is to provide the forum for teachers to upgrade

their knowledge, skills, and practices, it is useful

to assess the extent to which participation in these

activities helped teachers to achieve these

objectives. To gauge the perceived impact of

professional development programs, the 1998

survey asked teachers to assess the extent to

which their participation in programs in a

particular content area improved their teaching.

Of those teachers who participated in programs in

a particular area, the extent to which they

believed it improved their teaching “a lot” ranged

from 28 percent for in-depth study to 12 percent

for implementing state or district curriculum and

performance standards (tables 13 and B-10). Few

teachers indicated that a program did not help at

all. For every program, 70 to 80 percent of the

teachers reported that it was moderately or

somewhat effective. For example, for the

program that ranked highest in its perceived

impact (in-depth study in the subject area of the

main teaching assignment), 70 percent of teachers

believed that participation improved their
—28—

Table 14.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating that the activity improved their

teaching a lot, by teaching experience: 1998

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

State or district curriculum and performance standards......................... 12 12 14 11

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach 19 23 23 21

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning) ........................... 24 24 23 21

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment .... 33 31 28 26

Student performance assessment............................................................ 20 16 18 17

Classroom management, including student discipline............................ 28 18 17 16

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities ................................. 18 13 15 13

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds..................................................... 18 17 17 18

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

teaching moderately (44 percent) or somewhat

(26 percent).

Teachers’ perceptions about how much

participation in various professional development

programs improved their teaching were examined

against years of teaching experience. For most of

the 1998 content areas, teaching experience was

not related to teachers’ perception that

participation in that content area improved their

teaching “a lot.” The one area in which teaching

experience clearly was related was classroom

management. Newer teachers were more likely

than more experienced teachers to report that

professional development in classroom

management improved their teaching “a lot”

(tables 14 and B-10).

A criticism of short-term professional

development programs is that they fail to bring

about more long-term change in teachers’

competencies for classroom teaching. To further

assess the impact of professional development

programs, the 1998 data were explored to

examine whether the amount of time spent in

professional development activities made a

difference to perceived teaching improvement.

The number of hours teachers participated in

professional development programs was related

to how much they believed it improved their

classroom teaching (table 15). For every content

area, teachers who participated for more than 8

hours believed it improved their teaching more

than teachers who participated for 8 hours or less.

For example, teachers who spent more than 8

hours in professional development on new

methods of teaching in the classroom were more

likely than those who spent 1 to 8 hours to report

that participation in the program improved their

teaching “a lot” (39 versus 12 percent). These

patterns suggest that increased time spent in

professional development is associated with the

perception of significant improvements in

teaching.

Collaboration with

Other Teachers

Collaboration with other teachers is the second

feature of teachers’ continued learning addressed

in this report. Unlike traditional professional

development activities, peer collaboration has

been heralded by teachers, researchers, and

policymakers as essential to teachers’ continuous

learning. Initiatives to improve the quality and

efficacy of continued learning emphasize the

development of learning communities within and

across schools and highlight the importance of

these mechanisms to foster teacher learning.

Opportunities for collaboration include those that

are provided within the school and those that

occur within professional networks across schools

and other institutional structures. Teacher

participation in school-based activities is likely to

produce positive and long-lasting change because

such activities provide the basis for
—29—

Table 15.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent to which participation

in professional development activities in various content areas improved their

classroom teaching, by the number of hours spent in professional development in that

content area in the last 12 months: 1998

Improved my teaching Content area

A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

State or district curriculum and performance standards

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 7 34 44 15

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 20 39 31 10

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 12 36 44 8

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 38 43 17 2

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 12 43 40 6

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 39 41 18 2

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 12 47 38 3

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 41 41 17 1

Student performance assessment

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 10 37 45 7

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 35 41 20 3

Classroom management, including student discipline

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 13 39 40 8

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 40 41 14 5

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 8 37 49 7

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 42 32 23 3

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................ 9 34 47 10

More than 8 hours................................................................................. 38 34 23 5

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

transformative learning. Such collaboration

revolves around joint work and teacher networks.

Joint work such as team teaching, mentoring, and

formally planned meetings are important

mechanisms for productive exchange of ideas and

reflection about practice. For instance, the focus

on specific subject matter and teaching strategies

helps teachers to improve their content

knowledge and pedagogical skills. Mentoring is

an effective mechanism for one-to-one

professional guidance and for cultivating a

teaching culture in which expert teachers serve as

an essential resource for new teachers. All of

these teaching-related activities are consistent

with the view of professional development as a

lifelong, inquiry-based collegial process rooted in

the development of schools as collaborative

workplaces.

Collaborative relationships may extend beyond

classrooms and school buildings to schooluniversity collaborations or partnerships, teacherto-teacher and school-to-school networks, and

participation in district, regional, or national task

forces. These communities can be organized

across subject matter, pedagogical issues, and

significant school reforms. These networks can

be powerful learning tools to engage

professionals in collective work and allow

teachers to go beyond their own classrooms and

schools to engage in professional discourse about

their own experiences and the experiences of

others.
—30—

Figure 9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities related

to teaching in the last 12 months: 1998

81

62 61

53

26

19

0

20

40

60

80

100

Regularly

scheduled

collaboration

with other

teachers

Common

planning period

for team

teachers

Networking

with teachers

outside your

school

Individual or

collaborative

research

Mentoring

another teacher

in a formal

relationship

Being mentored 

by another

teacher in a

formal

relationship

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Participation in Collaborative Activities

To provide a national profile of teachers’ peer

collaboration, the 1993-94 survey asked teachers

about their participation in the last 12 months in

various mentoring and collaborating activities

related to teaching, and the extent to which they

felt each of these activities improved their

teaching. These activities were:

n A common planning period for team

teachers;

n Regularly scheduled collaboration with

other teachers, excluding meetings held for

administrative purposes;

n Being mentored by another teacher in a

formal relationship;

n Mentoring another teacher in a formal

relationship;

n Networking with teachers outside your

school; and

n Individual or collaborative research on a

topic of interest to you professionally.

Almost all (95 percent) of the teachers had

participated in at least one of the listed activities

in the last 12 months (not shown in tables).

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other

teachers was the activity in which teachers were

most likely to have participated, with four out of

five teachers reporting such collaborations in the

last 12 months (figure 9). About 60 percent of

the teachers had participated in common planning

periods for team teachers and networking with

teachers outside the school, and about half

reported involvement in individual or

collaborative research.15

Mentoring can be an important way for teachers

to share information and experiences about

teaching in a one-on-one relationship. Such

relationships may be particularly useful to new

teachers as they seek to develop effective

teaching practices. The study found that about a

quarter of the teachers indicated that they had

mentored another teacher in a formal relationship

in the last 12 months, and 19 percent said that

they had been mentored by another teacher in

 

15 While this section deals with teacher collaboration, individual or

collaborative research is discussed here because the item was

included in the set of questions that asked about collaborative

activities.
—31—

Figure 10.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in mentoring activities in

the last 12 months, by teaching experience: 1998

58

12

21

25

12

32

9

27

0

20

40

60

80

100

Being mentored by another teacher 

in a formal relationship

Mentoring another teacher 

in a formal relationship

Percent

3 or fewer years

4 to 9 years

10 to 19 years

20 or more years

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

such a relationship (figure 9). The relatively low

levels of teacher participation in mentoring reflect

a pattern in which newer teachers were more

likely than more experienced teachers to be

mentored. The likelihood of mentoring and of

being mentored by another teacher varied

substantially by years of teaching experience

(figure 10). Teachers with 3 or fewer years of

teaching experience were the most likely to have

been mentored by another teacher in the last 12

months and the least likely to have acted in the

role of mentor to another teacher. In fact, almost

three out of five new teachers had been mentored

by another teacher in the last year, suggesting that

schools and/or teachers recognize the importance

of such relationships early in a teacher’s career.

Frequency of Participation

Teachers were also asked how frequently they

had participated in the activities, within a range of

at least once a week to a few times a year; survey

results showed considerable variation on this

dimension (table 16). Among teachers who

reported engaging in a particular activity, they

participated the most frequently in common

planning periods for team teachers, with 60

percent participating at least once a week. This

was followed by mentoring another teacher in a

formal relationship (42 percent) and engaging in

regularly scheduled collaboration with other

teachers (34 percent). While many teachers

(61 percent) indicated that they had participated

in networking with other teachers outside the

school (figure 9), the frequency of this kind of

activity was low; 60 percent of these teachers

reported such interactions only a few times a

year.

Perceived Effect of Participation

Teachers who reported participating in an activity

were also asked to indicate the extent to which

they believed the activity improved their

classroom teaching. In general, participation in

most activities was perceived to improve

classroom teaching moderately or somewhat; few

teachers believed that participation in a particular

activity did not help their teaching at all (tables

17 and B-12). Moreover, 40 percent of teachers

who had a common planning period for team

teachers believed that this opportunity improved

their classroom teaching a lot, while one-third

reported experiencing similar benefits from

individual or collaborative research, or from

being mentored by another teacher.
—32—

Table 16.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in activities related to

teaching in the last 12 months, by frequency of participation: 1998

Frequency of participation*

Activity A few times

a year

Once a

month

2 to 3 times

a month

At least

once a week

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers.......................... 23 21 22 34

Common planning period for team teachers........................................... 15 11 14 60

Networking with teachers outside your school....................................... 60 18 12 10

Individual or collaborative research on a topic of interest

professionally..................................................................................... 48 16 18 19

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship................................ 29 12 17 42

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship.................. 46 14 17 24

*Percents are based on those who participated in a particular activity related to teaching.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Table 17.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities related

to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they believe the activity

improved their teaching: 1998

Improved classroom teaching

Activity

A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers.......................... 29 35 31 5

Common planning period for team teachers........................................... 40 33 23 4

Networking with teachers outside your school....................................... 23 33 41 4

Individual or collaborative research on a topic of interest

professionally..................................................................................... 34 35 29 2

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship................................ 19 30 39 11

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship.................. 34 27 32 7

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Being mentored by another teacher was not only a

more frequent occurrence for beginning teachers,

but it was generally perceived to be of more

benefit to their teaching as well. Among teachers

who had been mentored in the last 12 months, 45

percent with 3 or fewer years of experience

believed it improved their teaching “a lot,”

compared with 18 percent of teachers with 20 or

more years of teaching experience (figure 11 and

table B-12). This again suggests the importance

of such relationships early in a teacher’s career.

In addition, more experienced teachers may be

mentored for different reasons and therefore may

not have the same experience with being

mentored.

Frequency of participation in a collaborative

activity was generally positively related to

teachers’ beliefs about the extent to which the

activity improved their classroom teaching (table

18). For example, the extent to which

participation in a common planning period for

team teachers was perceived to improve teaching

“a lot” ranged from 13 percent for those who

participated a few times a year to 52 percent for

those who were involved in the activity at least

once a week. Thus, frequent participation in a

mentoring or collaborating activity was more

likely to lead to the perception of improved

classroom teaching.
—33—

Figure 11.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent to which being

mentored improved their classroom teaching, by teaching experience: 1998

45

26 25

5

31

26

36

8

32

28

35

5

18

27

39

15

0

20

40

60

80

100

A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

Improved classroom teaching

Percent

3 or fewer years

4 to 9 years

10 to 19 years

20 or more years

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Summary

This chapter began with the premise that highquality teachers are lifelong learners. This

assumption is based on the recognition that

teaching is a complex profession with changing

and growing demands. In order to meet the

demands they face in their classrooms, teachers

must be willing and capable to learn and relearn

their trade. Opportunities for continued learning

addressed in this chapter—formal professional

development and collaboration with other

teachers—are two key features of teacher

learning.

Results of the 1998 survey indicate that teacher

participation in formal professional development

is high; almost all teachers had recent training in

at least one of the listed content areas. Moreover,

teachers were more likely to have had recent

training in programs that seem consistent with the

challenge to do things differently and better; these

programs focused on topics such as the

implementation of state and district curricula, the

integration of technology into classroom

instruction, and the implementation of new

teaching methods. However, in spite of

increasing classroom diversity in our schools,

teachers were least likely to have had recent

professional development that addressed the

needs of limited English proficient or culturally

diverse students.

The data suggest that although continued learning

is equally relevant for new and experienced

teachers, the specific needs for training in some

content areas may vary by years of teaching

experience. For example, newer teachers were

more likely than very experienced teachers to

participate in professional development that

focused on classroom management and teaching

methods, reflecting a strong need for training on

these topics during the early years of teaching.

Teacher participation in professional development

programs was typically short, lasting for the

equivalent of one day or less of training.

Moreover, a key finding was that increased time

spent in professional development was associated

with the perception of significant improvements

in teaching. For every content area, teachers who
—34—

Table 18.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent to which participation

in activities related to teaching improved their classroom teaching, by the frequency

with which they participated in that activity in the last 12 months: 1998

Improved my teaching Activity A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers, excluding

meetings held for administrative purposes

A few times a year.............................................................................. 15 22 54 9

Once a month ..................................................................................... 16 41 38 6

2 to 3 times a month........................................................................... 26 46 25 3

At least once a week........................................................................... 49 33 15 2

Common planning period for team teachers

A few times a year.............................................................................. 13 29 47 11

Once a month ..................................................................................... 26 38 29 7

2 to 3 times a month........................................................................... 31 42 23 4

At least once a week........................................................................... 52 31 16 2

Networking with teachers outside your school

A few times a year.............................................................................. 15 29 51 5

Once a month ..................................................................................... 24 39 34 2

2 to 3 times a month........................................................................... 36 43 20 1

At least once a week........................................................................... 49 31 18 3

Individual or collaborative research on a topic of interest to you

professionally

A few times a year.............................................................................. 22 38 38 2

Once a month ..................................................................................... 26 46 26 2

2 to 3 times a month........................................................................... 46 31 21 2

At least once a week........................................................................... 62 23 15 *

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship

A few times a year.............................................................................. 9 32 47 12

Once a month ..................................................................................... 20 22 41 16

2 to 3 times a month........................................................................... 15 34 40 11

At least once a week........................................................................... 28 30 33 8

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship

A few times a year.............................................................................. 11 25 50 13

Once a month ..................................................................................... 31 39 23 7

2 to 3 times a month........................................................................... 50 31 19 0

At least once a week........................................................................... 70 18 11 1

*Less than 0.5 percent.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

participated for more than 8 hours were far more

likely than those who participated for fewer hours

to report that the activity improved their teaching.

Participation in collaborative activities was also

perceived to yield positive outcomes for

classroom teaching. Most teachers felt that

collaborative activities helped improve their

teaching to some degree. Moreover, the

frequency of participation in a collaborative

activity was generally positively related to

teachers’ beliefs about the extent to which the

activity improved their classroom teaching. For

example, 70 percent of teachers who were

mentored at least once a week reported that it

improved their teaching “a lot.”

Formal professional development and

collaboration with other teachers are important

features of teacher learning. However, these

experiences are most beneficial when coupled

with a supportive work environment. Teachers’

work environment is the focus of the next

chapter.
—35—

4. SUPPORTIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT

Teachers’ work environment is the final aspect of

teacher quality addressed in this report. The

model for thinking about teacher quality

(presented in the introduction chapter) began with

different types of teacher learning and ended with

the support teachers receive to pursue continued

learning. This model suggests that in addition to

teacher learning (both preservice and continued),

one key factor to understanding teacher quality is

focusing on what happens to teachers once they

enter the work force, including if they receive

support from the schools and communities in

which they work (e.g., induction programs for

new teachers and the number of students for

whom teachers are responsible) and from the

parents of the children they teach.

Three features of teachers’ work environment

were measured in the 1998 survey: (1) induction

programs; (2) class size; and (3) teachers’

perceptions of parent and school support.

Induction Programs

Formal induction programs, particularly for new

teachers, are the first feature of teachers’ work

environment investigated here. Induction

programs are typically designed to both improve

teaching skills of beginning teachers and reduce

attrition. Providing support for beginning

teachers in U.S. schools has been the focus of

increasing attention since the mid-1980s, mainly

because attrition rates among new teachers are

often much higher than among experienced

teachers. This suggests that the transition into

teaching is difficult for beginning teachers

(Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation, 1997).

Often, new teachers are hired at the last minute,

isolated in their classrooms, and provided little

assistance with their often overwhelming duties

(Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation, 1997).

From a policy standpoint, induction may increase

the efficacy and retention of quality teachers

because it has the potential to help new teachers

cope with classroom realities and adjust to school

environments. By providing continuity and

support to beginning teachers’ transition into

teaching, induction programs may address a

critical stage of the career-long continuum of

teacher professional development.

Comprehensive induction programs are often tied

to certification. In general, these programs

emphasize instructional support in the form of

skills, knowledge, and strategies for effective

classroom teaching, and psychological support in

the form of encouraging confidence building

(Gold, 1996). These initial experiences exert a

powerful influence in anchoring new teachers’

feelings and perceptions about their capabilities

and future careers. Teacher participation in an

induction program is, therefore, a useful indicator

of the extent to which elementary and secondary

public schools are addressing the issue of training

and retaining quality teachers.

The 1998 survey asked teachers to indicate if,

when they first began teaching, they participated

in a formal induction program (e.g., a program to

help beginning teachers by assigning them to

master or mentor teachers). Thirty-four percent

of full-time public school teachers in the 1998

study indicated that they had participated in such

a program (table B-13). The 1993-94 survey

asked a similar question and found that 28 percent

of full-time public school teachers had

participated in an induction program during their

first year (table C-10). Participation in an

induction program varied considerably by

teaching experience (figure 12 and table B-13).

Newer teachers were more likely to have

participated in an induction program than were

more experienced teachers, ranging from 65

percent of teachers with 3 or fewer years of

experience to 14 percent of teachers with 20 or

more years of experience. The 1993-94 data

showed similar findings, with less experienced

teachers being more likely to have had a formal

induction into teaching than teachers with more

experience (figure 13). Teachers with 3 or fewer

years of experience were more likely to have

participated in an induction program in 1998 than

in 1993-94 (65 percent compared with 59

percent), suggesting that there may be more

emphasis on induction programs in recent years.
—36—

Figure 12.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program when they first began teaching, by teaching experience: 1998

65

55

28

14

0

20

40

60

80

100

3 or fewer years 4 to 9 years 10 to 19 years 20 or more years

Teaching experience

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Figure 13.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program during their first year of teaching, by teaching experience: 1993-94

59

47

17 16

0

20

40

60

80

100

3 or fewer years 4 to 9 years 10 to 19 years 20 or more years

Teaching experience

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
—37—

Figure 14.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the length of the formal induction

program in which they participated when they first began teaching: 1998

12 10

66

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

3 months or less More than 3 months

to 8 months

9 months to 1 year More than 1 year

Percent

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Teachers in the 1998 study who participated in an

induction program were asked to write in the

length of that program. Two-thirds of the

teachers indicated that they participated in

induction programs that lasted from 9 months to a

year (figure 14). Some of the induction programs

in which teachers participated lasted more than a

year (12 percent of the teachers), while some

were quite short, lasting 3 months or less (also 12

percent of the teachers). The remaining 10

percent of the teachers participated in induction

programs that were more than 3 months through 8

months in length. Unfortunately, it is not possible

to determine the intensity or usefulness of the

induction program from its length. In fact,

comments written in on the questionnaire by

some teachers indicated that some programs that

lasted for a year actually involved relatively little

interaction with the master or mentor teacher to

whom they were assigned, such as a few meetings

between the teachers over the course of the year.

Class Size

The second feature of the work environment

examined in this report is class size. Reducing

class size is among President Clinton’s priorities

as outlined in his Education and Training

Priorities for the Fall (August 1998). The

relevance of class size to student outcomes is a

hotly debated issue that has come to the forefront

of current policy initiatives. Common-sense

appeal and considerable research evidence

suggest that smaller classes contribute to

improved student performance, especially for

elementary school students and students who are

at risk. Others contend that the lack of consistent

research evidence makes it difficult to justify the

cost of implementing across-the-board reductions

in class size. However, there is some agreement

that class size matters when certain sizes are

compared (very large and very small classes) and

when some populations are considered (students

disadvantaged by poverty and disabilities).

Moreover, research shows that teachers prefer

smaller classes (U.S. Department of Education,

1997). Although the academic debate continues

and despite the substantial costs involved, many

states and the federal government have taken

initiatives to reduce class size.

Both the 1998 and 1993-94 surveys asked

teachers about the number of students taught.

From this information, average class size was

calculated. In 1998, the average class size for

full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms16 was 23 students; it was

 

16 The category labeled general elementary classrooms for the 1998

FRSS study includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms,

regardless of instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the

self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.
—38—

Table 19.—Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms

and departmentalized settings, by selected school characteristics: 1998

Teaching assignment

School characteristic General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized

settings

All targeted public school teachers2............................................................ 23 24

Locale

Central city...................................................................................................... 23 25

Urban fringe/large town .................................................................................. 23 25

Rural/small town ............................................................................................. 21 22

Region

Northeast ......................................................................................................... 23 23

Midwest........................................................................................................... 22 23

South ............................................................................................................... 22 23

West ................................................................................................................ 23 28

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................................................................... 22 23

6 to 20 percent................................................................................................. 23 24

21 to 50 percent............................................................................................... 23 24

More than 50 percent....................................................................................... 23 25

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent........................................................................................ 23 24

15 to 32 percent............................................................................................... 22 24

33 to 59 percent............................................................................................... 22 24

60 percent or more........................................................................................... 23 24

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of

instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

2Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

24 students for teachers in departmentalized

settings (tables 19 and B-14). In 1993-94, the

average class size for full-time public school

teachers was 24 students for both general

elementary classrooms17 and departmentalized

settings18 (tables 20 and C-11). Thus, average

class size was larger for teachers in 1993-94 than

in 1998 for teachers in general elementary

classrooms, but not for teachers in

departmentalized settings. This difference in

class size for general elementary classrooms may

represent an actual decrease in class size over

time, due to factors such as increased emphasis

on smaller classes in recent years. Alternatively,

 

17 The category labeled general elementary classrooms for the 1993-

94 SASS study includes the teachers who indicated that their main

teaching assignment was general elementary.

18 The category labeled departmentalized settings for the 1993-94

SASS study includes the teachers who indicated that their main

teaching assignment was in English/language arts, social

studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

this difference may be due to methodological

differences between the studies, such as the

different ways in which the class size information

was collected on the questionnaires, or

differences in data collection procedures.19 Both

studies did, however, show some of the same

general patterns of differences by school

characteristics.

Average class size was found to differ by school

locale. The 1998 data indicate that for both

general elementary and departmentalized

teachers, teachers in rural areas and small towns

had smaller classes, on average, than did teachers

in central cities or in urban fringe areas or large

towns (tables 19 and B-14). Teachers in 1993-94

also showed differences by locale (tables 20 and

C-11), with both general elementary and

departmentalized classrooms in rural areas and

 

19See appendix A for a discussion of comparisons between the two

surveys.
—39—

Table 20.—Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms

and departmentalized settings, by selected school characteristics: 1993-94

Teaching assignment

School characteristic General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized

settings2

All targeted public school teachers3............................................................ 24 24

Locale

Central city...................................................................................................... 25 25

Urban fringe/large town .................................................................................. 25 24

Rural/small town ............................................................................................. 23 22

Region

Northeast ......................................................................................................... 24 22

Midwest........................................................................................................... 23 23

South ............................................................................................................... 23 24

West ................................................................................................................ 27 26

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................................................................... 23 23

6 to 20 percent................................................................................................. 24 23

21 to 50 percent............................................................................................... 24 24

More than 50 percent....................................................................................... 24 25

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent........................................................................................ 24 24

15 to 32 percent............................................................................................... 24 23

33 to 59 percent............................................................................................... 24 24

60 percent or more........................................................................................... 24 24

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was general elementary.

2The category labeled departmentalized settings includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment

was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

NOTE: Approximately 5 percent of the teachers were excluded from the SASS class size analyses, either because they taught “pull-out” classes,

where they provided instruction to students who were released from their regular classes (2 percent), or because of reporting problems in their

class size information (3 percent).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

small towns smaller on average than those located

in central cities or in urban fringe areas or large

towns.

Average class size also varied by region. In

1998, departmentalized teachers in the West

taught an average of 28 students in a class,

compared with an average of 23 students in the

other regions. In 1993-94, average class size also

differed by region, although the pattern was

somewhat different for general elementary and

departmentalized teachers. For general

elementary teachers, teachers in the West had the

largest class sizes. For departmentalized teachers,

average class size differed for each region,

ranging from 22 to 26 students. Teachers in the

West had the largest classes, followed by teachers

in the South, then teachers in the Midwest, and

then teachers in the Northeast.

In addition, average class size varied by minority

enrollment in the school. In 1998, departmentalized teachers in schools with very low

minority enrollment (5 percent or less) had

smaller classes, on average, than did teachers at

schools with minority enrollments of 6 to 20

percent and 21 to 50 percent, who in turn taught

smaller classes than did teachers at schools with

more than 50 percent minority enrollment.

Average class size also showed differences by

minority enrollment for teachers in 1993-94. For

departmentalized teachers, teachers in schools

with minority enrollments of 5 percent or less

taught smaller classes, on average, than did

teachers in schools with minority enrollments of
—40—

Figure 15.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers: 1998

63

55

47

33 32

36 38

54

4

7

11 11

1 2

4 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

Other teachers share

ideas that are helpful

to me in my work

The school 

administration 

supports me 

in my work

Goals and priorities 

for the school 

are clear

Parents support me

in my efforts to

educate their

children

Percent

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

21 to 50 percent and more than 50 percent.

General elementary teachers showed this same

pattern. In addition, departmentalized teachers in

schools with 6 to 20 percent minority enrollment

had smaller classes than did teachers at schools

with more than 50 percent minority enrollment.

Parent and School Support

The final aspect of teachers’ work environment

addressed in this report is teachers’ perceptions of

parent and school support. These indicators have

been included in this chapter based on the

premise that effective teaching requires support

beyond that typically available to teachers

working alone in isolated classrooms (Newmann,

1994). According to the Center on Organization

and Restructuring of Schools (Kruse, Louis, and

Bryk, 1994: 5): “Teachers must feel they are

honored for their expertise—within the school as

well as within the district, the parent community

and other significant groups.”

The 1998 survey asked teachers to indicate the

extent to which they agreed or disagreed with

four statements about supportive working

conditions: one statement about the extent to

which goals and priorities of the school are clear,

and three statements about the extent to which

teachers receive support from other teachers,

school administrators, and parents. Teachers in

the 1993-94 study were asked similar questions

for three of these areas, although only the

statement about goals and priorities for the school

was exactly the same in the two surveys.

In 1998, most of the teachers believed that goals

and priorities for the school were clear, with 47

percent agreeing strongly and 38 percent agreeing

somewhat with this statement (figure 15). In

1993-94, most teachers also believed that the

goals and priorities for the school were clear, with

37 percent agreeing strongly and 45 percent

agreeing somewhat (figure 16). Teachers in 1998

and 1993-94 did differ in whether they strongly

agreed that the school’s goals and priorities were

clear, but methodological artifacts, such as the

response contexts for the items, could contribute

to the difference.

Collegial support is key to creating and sustaining

a collaborative environment. Apart from the

school administration’s responsibility to nurture

such an environment, it can exert a strong

influence on teacher commitment and job

satisfaction by providing one-to-one support to

teachers. It is therefore important to examine the

extent to which teachers feel supported by other
—41—

Figure 16.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers: 1993-94

41 37

11

38

45 42

14 14

30

7

4

17

0

20

40

60

80

100

The school administration's

behavior toward the

staff is supportive

and encouraging

Goals and priorities 

for the school 

are clear

I receive a great 

deal of support 

from parents for 

the work I do

Percent

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

teachers and the school administration. In

response to the statement about collegial support,

most teachers in 1998 felt that other teachers

shared ideas with them that were helpful in their

teaching; 63 percent of teachers strongly agreed

with this statement, and 33 percent somewhat

agreed with it (figure 15 and table B-15).

In 1998, most teachers felt supported by the

school administration, with 55 percent of teachers

agreeing strongly and 36 percent agreeing

somewhat that the school administration

supported them in their work (figure 15 and table

B-15). Most teachers in 1993-94 also felt that the

school administration was supportive; 41 percent

of teachers agreed strongly and 38 percent agreed

somewhat that the school administration’s

behavior toward them was supportive and

encouraging (figure 16 and table C-12).

Support from parents provides a necessary link

between home and school, laying the foundation

for a partnership that serves to engage student,

parent, and teacher commitment. The 1998 and

1993-94 data showed that teachers perceived

somewhat less support from parents than from

other teachers (1998) and the school

administration (both studies). For example, in

1998, 32 percent of teachers in 1998 agreed

strongly and 54 percent agreed somewhat that

parents supported them in their efforts to educate

their children (figure 15 and table B-15). The

1993-94 study asked a somewhat differently

worded question about parental support: teachers

were asked to indicate the extent to which they

agreed or disagreed with the statement that they

receive “a great deal of support” from parents for

the work they do (as compared with “parents

support me in my efforts to educate their

children” in 1998). For teachers in 1993-94, 11

percent agreed strongly and 42 percent agreed

somewhat with this statement, and 30 percent

disagreed somewhat and 17 percent disagreed

strongly that they received a great deal of support

from parents (figure 16 and table C-12).

In 1998, teachers’ perceptions of collegial and

school support varied by the instructional level of

the school, with elementary school teachers

perceiving stronger collegial and school support

than high school teachers (figure 17 and table B15). For example, 69 percent of elementary

school teachers compared with 53 percent of high

school teachers strongly agreed that other

teachers shared ideas that were helpful to their

teaching. The 1993-94 data also showed some
—42—

Figure 17.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by school instructional level:

1998

69

56

52

36

60 59

48

30

53

49

37

24

49 48

32

25

0

20

40

60

80

100

Other teachers share

ideas that are helpful

to me in my work

The school 

administration 

supports me 

in my work

Goals and priorities 

for the school 

are clear

Parents support me

in my efforts to

educate their

children

Percent

Elementary school

Middle school

High school

Combined

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

variation in perceived school support by the

instructional level of the school (figure 18 and

table C-12), with elementary school teachers

perceiving more support than high school

teachers. For example, 44 percent of elementary

school teachers compared with 33 percent of high

school teachers strongly agreed that the school

administration’s behavior toward the staff was

supportive and encouraging.

Teachers’ perceptions of parental support also

varied by the instructional level of the school.

For example, 36 percent of 1998 elementary

school teachers compared with 24 percent of high

school teachers strongly agreed that parents

support them in their efforts to educate their

children (figure 17 and table B-15). For 1993-94,

teachers’ perceived support from parents, while

low overall, also showed this pattern of variation

by instructional level, with 15 percent of

elementary school teachers compared with 6

percent of high school teachers strongly agreeing

that they received a great deal of support from

parents for the work that they do (figure 18 and

table C-12).

In 1998, teachers’ perceptions of parent and

school support also showed some variation by

years of teaching experience. Less experienced

teachers perceived more support from other

teachers and the school administration, and less

support from parents, than did more experienced

teachers. For example, 67 percent of teachers

with 3 or fewer years of experience compared

with 60 percent of teachers with 20 or more years

of experience strongly agreed that other teachers

shared ideas that were helpful to their teaching;

26 percent of the least experienced teachers

compared with 33 percent of the most

experienced teachers strongly agreed that parents

supported them in their efforts to educate their

children (figure 19 and table B-15). Teachers in

1993-94 also varied by years of teaching

experience in their views of support from the

school administration. For example, 48 percent

of the least experienced teachers compared with

38 percent of the most experienced teachers

strongly agreed that the school administration’s

behavior toward the staff was supportive and

encouraging (figure 20 and table C-12).
—43—

Figure 18.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by school instructional level:

1993-94

44 44

15

41

35

8

33

25

6

36

27

7

0

20

40

60

80

100

The school administration's

behavior toward the

staff is supportive

and encouraging

Goals and priorities 

for the school 

are clear

I receive a great

deal of support

from parents for

the work I do

Percent

Elementary school

Middle school

High school

Combined

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

Figure 19.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by teaching experience: 1998

67

60

46

26

66

56

46

32

62

53

48

32

60

52

48

33

0

20

40

60

80

100

Other teachers share

ideas that are helpful

to me in my work

The school 

administration 

supports me 

in my work

Goals and priorities 

for the school 

are clear

Parents support me

in my efforts to

educate their

children

Percent

3 or fewer years

4 to 9 years

10 to 19 years

20 or more years

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
—44—

Figure 20.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by teaching experience:

1993-94

48

37

10

40

35

10

41 40

11

38 37

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

The school administration's

behavior toward the

staff is supportive

and encouraging

Goals and priorities 

for the school 

are clear

I receive a great

deal of support

from parents for

the work I do

Percent

3 or fewer years

4 to 9 years

10 to 19 years

20 or more years

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.

Perceived support from parents was also related

to the concentration of poverty in the school (as

defined by the percentage of students eligible for

free or reduced-price lunch) (figure 21 and table

B-15). In 1998, 41 percent of the teachers in

schools with the lowest concentration of poverty

(less than 15 percent eligible for free or reducedprice lunch) strongly agreed that parents support

their efforts, compared with 29 percent of

teachers in schools with 33 to 59 percent eligible

for free or reduced-price lunch, and 23 percent of

teachers in schools with 60 percent or more

eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (figure 21

and table B-15). The 1993-94 data also showed

differences in perceived support from parents by

concentration of poverty in the school. As with

the 1998 data, the general pattern in 1993-94 was

for teachers in schools with the lowest

concentration of poverty to perceive somewhat

more support from parents than did teachers in

schools with the highest concentration of poverty

(figure 22 and table C-12).

Summary

This chapter began with the premise that in

addition to good training and opportunities for

continued learning, quality teaching is dependent

on the environment in which teachers work.

Talented, well-trained teachers are most effective

in environments that support their work and

professional growth.

Results of the 1998 survey indicate that in many

respects, teachers do view their work

environments as supportive. Most teachers in

1998 felt supported by the school administration

and felt that school goals and priorities were

clear. In addition, most teachers believed that

other teachers shared ideas with them that were

helpful to their teaching. Additionally, average

class sizes were lower in 1998 than in 1993-94

for teachers in general elementary classrooms.

The 1998 survey also indicates aspects of

teachers’ work environments that could be

improved. For example, in 1998, two-thirds of

America’s full-time public school teachers have

not participated in an induction program.

However, the 1998 survey indicates that about
—45—

Figure 21.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing that parents support

them in their efforts to educate their children, by percent of students in school eligible

for free or reduced-price school lunch: 1998

41

34

29

23

53 56 5753

5

9

11

17

1 1

3

7

0

20

40

60

80

100

Less than 15 percent 15 to 32 percent 33 to 59 percent 60 percent or more

Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch

Percent

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Figure 22.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing that they receive a

great deal of support from parents for the work they do, by percent of students in

school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch: 1993-94

15

11 9 10

48

44 41

33

27 30 31 33

11

16 19

25

0

20

40

60

80

100

Less than 15 percent 15 to 32 percent 33 to 59 percent 60 percent or more

Percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch

Percent

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
—46—

two-thirds of new teachers (those with 3 or fewer

years of experience) did participate in such

programs. In addition, teachers with 3 or fewer

years of experience were more likely to have

participated in an induction program in 1998 than

in 1993-94 (65 percent compared with 59

percent), suggesting that there may be more

emphasis on induction programs in recent years.

One-third of teachers in 1998 agreed strongly that

parents support their efforts to educate the

parents’ children, with elementary school teachers

perceiving greater support from parents than high

school teachers. There was also variation in

perceived support by the poverty concentration in

the school. The general pattern in both the 1998

and 1993-94 studies was for teachers in schools

with the lowest concentration of poverty to

perceive somewhat more support from parents

than did teachers in schools with the highest

concentration of poverty.
—47—

5. TEACHERS’ FEELINGS

OF PREPAREDNESS

The final aspect of the teacher quality model used

in this study is teachers’ feelings of preparedness.

In previous chapters, this FRSS report provided

information on a number of measures of teacher

preparation and qualifications, including

preservice and continued learning and work

environments. However, teachers now are

challenged by reform initiatives to meet new

requirements that have not been part of the

conventional repertoire of expectations for

effective classroom teaching and for which many

teachers have not been adequately prepared

during their professional training. As a result,

information about teacher qualifications and

preparation does not completely address whether

preservice and continued learning and work

environments adequately prepare teachers to meet

the often complex and changing demands they

face in their classrooms. Teachers’ feelings of

preparedness may indicate the extent to which

their training prepares them to meet these

challenges.

Teachers’ Preparedness for

Classroom Requirements

To fully answer the question of whether educators

are adequately prepared to teach our children

requires extensive, in-depth studies of teachers

(including their practices) and student

outcomes—both of which are beyond the scope

of this report. However, one approach to

addressing these concerns is to examine the

extent to which teachers themselves feel prepared

to meet these demands. The 1998 survey asked

teachers to indicate how well prepared they felt

for some of the most compelling classroom

demands; these requirements were discussed

earlier as content areas in which teachers had

professional development (see chapter 3). The

requirements were:

n Maintain order and discipline in the

classroom;

n Implement new methods of teaching (e.g.,

cooperative learning);

n Implement state or district curriculum and

performance standards;

n Use student performance assessment

techniques;

n Address the needs of students with

disabilities;

n Integrate educational technology into the

grade or subject taught; and

n Address the needs of students with limited

English proficiency or from diverse

cultural backgrounds.

The data indicate that teachers generally felt

either “moderately” or “somewhat” well prepared

for most classroom activities (tables 21 and B19). One exception was teacher preparedness to

maintain classroom order and discipline; a

majority (71 percent) of teachers felt “very well

prepared” for this classroom demand. In contrast,

few teachers (9 percent or less) felt they were not

at all prepared for various activities. The one

exception was that 17 percent of teachers felt not

at all prepared to address the needs of students

who lack proficiency in English or come from

diverse cultural backgrounds.

Since feeling “very well prepared” is one possible

indicator of a high-quality teacher, it is useful to

compare teachers’ self-assessments across

classroom activities to identify the requirements

for which teachers felt most prepared. Teachers

were most likely to report being very well

prepared for maintaining order and discipline in

the classroom (71 percent; tables 21 and B-19).

Classroom management has been identified as a

major influence on teacher performance, a key

source of teachers’ job-related stress, and, in

general, an essential prerequisite for student

learning (Jones, 1996). Having an overwhelming
—48—

Table 21.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to do

various activities in the classroom: 1998

How well prepared teachers feel

Activity Very well

prepared

Moderately

well

prepared

Somewhat

well

prepared

Not at all

prepared

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom...................................... 71 24 4 1

Implement new methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning).......... 41 41 16 2

Implement state or district curriculum and performance standards........ 36 41 20 3

Use student performance assessment techniques ................................... 28 41 26 4

Address the needs of students with disabilities* .................................... 21 41 30 7

Integrate educational technology in the grade or subject you teach ....... 20 37 34 9

Address the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds* ................................................... 20 33 30 17

*Percents are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

majority of teachers who felt very well prepared

to meet this core classroom requirement is an

important indicator. Fewer teachers felt very well

prepared to meet other typical classroom

requirements for which teachers receive both

initial and on-the-job training (tables 21 and B19). For instance, fewer teachers believed they

were very well prepared to implement new

teaching methods (41 percent), implement state or

district curriculum and performance standards (36

percent), and use student performance assessment

techniques (28 percent).

Teachers were least likely to report being very

well prepared for activities that have more

recently become an essential part of expectations

for classroom teaching: integrating educational

technology into the grade or subject taught,

addressing the needs of limited English proficient

or culturally diverse students, and addressing the

needs of students with disabilities (tables 21 and

B-19). While many educators and policy analysts

consider educational technology a vehicle for

transforming education, relatively few teachers

felt very well equipped to integrate technology

into classroom instruction (20 percent).

Increased classroom diversity has brought equity

issues to the forefront of the education reform

agenda, but past studies have shown that many

teachers were not trained to meet the demands of

diverse student populations.20 The 1998 survey

found that 54 percent of the teachers taught

limited English proficient or culturally diverse

students, while 71 percent taught students with

disabilities (not shown in tables). However, at a

time when classrooms are becoming increasingly

diverse, relatively few teachers reported being

very well prepared to address the needs of limited

English proficient or culturally diverse students

(20 percent) or students with disabilities (21

percent, tables 21 and B-19).

The likelihood of being very or moderately well

prepared to address the needs of limited English

proficient or culturally diverse students varied

with the percent minority enrollment in the school

(figure 23 and table B-19). Thus, among teachers

who taught limited English proficient or

culturally diverse students, 27 percent of teachers

from schools with more than 50 percent minority

enrollment believed they were very well prepared

to meet the needs of these students, compared

with 10 percent feeling very well prepared at

schools with minority enrollments of 5 percent or

less.

 

20 For instance, an earlier report on the 1993-94 SASS data showed

that while 39 percent of all teachers taught students with limited

English proficiency, just over one-quarter of teachers with these

students had any training to meet this student need (U.S.

Department of Education, 1997) .
—49—

Figure 23.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well or moderately

well prepared to address the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds, by percent minority enrollment in the school: 1998

10

15

20

27 25

33 34

37

0

20

40

60

80

100

5 percent or less 6 to 20 percent 21 to 50 percent More than 50 percent

Percent minority enrollment in the school

Percent

Very well prepared

Moderately well prepared

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Teacher Preparedness and

Teaching Experience

Beginning teachers are rarely totally prepared to

meet core classroom requirements, including

classroom management. Yet, in the context of

education reform, experience may not necessarily

translate into better teacher preparedness for

certain classroom activities, unless experienced

teachers have had continued training to upgrade

their skills and knowledge in those areas.

Integrating technology into classroom instruction

and employing new teaching strategies are two

such areas. It is therefore useful to examine

whether teaching experience makes a difference

in the extent to which teachers felt prepared for

various classroom requirements.

Teachers’ self-perceived preparedness for various

classroom activities did not always vary by

teaching experience (tables 22 and B-19). For

instance, teachers’ perceptions of being very well

prepared to implement new methods of teaching

did not vary significantly by teaching experience.

Similarly, newer teachers did not differ from

more experienced teachers in feeling very well

prepared to address the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from diverse

cultural backgrounds.

Teaching experience might be expected to make a

difference in being prepared to manage

classrooms because this area of expertise may be

particularly problematic for beginning teachers

(Jones 1996). The 1998 data supported this

expectation (tables 22 and B-19). Teachers with

3 or fewer years of teaching experience were less

likely than more experienced teachers to report

being very well prepared to maintain order and

discipline in the classroom. The extent to which

teachers felt prepared to implement state or

district curriculum also varied by teaching

experience, with newer teachers less likely than

more experienced teachers to report being very

well prepared for this classroom requirement

(tables 22 and B-19).
—50—

Table 22.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well prepared to do

various activities in the classroom, by teaching experience: 1998

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom...................................... 54 70 72 76

Implement new methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning).......... 37 44 41 40

Implement state or district curriculum and performance standards........ 28 36 37 39

Use student performance assessment techniques ................................... 23 27 29 30

Address the needs of students with disabilities* .................................... 15 21 25 21

Integrate educational technology in the grade or subject you teach ....... 24 23 19 19

Address the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds* ................................................... 18 21 22 18

*Percents are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Teacher Preparedness

and Participation in

Professional Development

As a subjective measure of teacher quality,

teacher preparedness incorporates what the

teacher brings to the classroom from preservice

learning and on-the-job learning. To the extent

that professional development is geared to

provide on-the-job-learning in key areas of

classroom teaching, recent participation in

professional development programs should

contribute to teachers being better prepared for

the requirements of classroom teaching. It is

therefore important to examine the degree of

correspondence between the level of teacher

participation in professional development in

various content areas in the past 12 months and

the extent to which teachers felt prepared for

classroom responsibilities in these areas.

High levels of recent teacher participation in

professional development in various content areas

generally did not match overall levels of selfperceived teacher preparedness for a classroom

activity (table 23). In every classroom activity

except one, the proportion of teachers who had

recently participated in professional development

on a relevant topic was considerably higher than

the proportion of teachers who felt very well

prepared for that classroom requirement. The one

exception to this pattern was classroom

management. While about half of the teachers had

recent professional development in this content

area, a much higher proportion of teachers felt

very well prepared for the classroom requirement

(71 percent).

Differences between the proportion of teachers

who had recent professional development versus

the proportion of teachers who felt very well

prepared for classroom demands provide a rough

assessment of the degree of correspondence

between opportunities for on-the-job learning and

overall needs for ongoing teacher preparation.

These differences point to disparities between

recent teacher participation in professional

development and self-perceived teacher

preparedness for classroom demands, but they do

not directly address the impact of recent

professional development on teacher

preparedness. It is not easy, however, to assess

this impact, since recent exposure to professional

development is only one of several influences on

teacher preparedness for core classroom

requirements.21

In every content area except classroom

management, less than half of the teachers who

had recent professional development felt very

well prepared to meet classroom requirements in

these areas (table 23). For example, of the

teachers who recently participated in professional

 

21Other influences include initial teacher preparation, teaching

experience, and other opportunities for teacher learning.
—51—

Table 23.—Comparison of recent teacher participation in professional development in various

content areas and perceived teacher preparedness for classroom requirements in those

content areas: 1998

Activity

Percent of teachers

indicating they

participated in

professional

development activities

Percent of all teachers

indicating they felt very

well prepared for the

classroom activity

Of the teachers who

participated in

professional

development, percent

indicating they felt very

well prepared for the

classroom activity

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom .......... 49 71 68

Implement new teaching methods .............................. 77 41 43

Implement state or district curriculum and

performance standards ........................................... 81 36 38

Use student performance assessment techniques........ 67 28 33

Address the needs of students with disabilities........... 48 21 25

Integrate educational technology into the grade or

subject taught ......................................................... 78 20 23

Address the needs of students with limited English

proficiency or from diverse cultural

backgrounds........................................................... 31 20 28

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

development in implementing new teaching

methods, 43 percent felt very well prepared for

this classroom activity. Similarly, 38 percent of

teachers who had professional development in

implementing state or district curriculum and

performance standards felt very well prepared for

the classroom activity.

Another way to assess the impact of professional

development is to examine differences in

preparedness between the proportion of teachers

who had recently participated in professional

development in each content area versus those

who did not participate (figure 24). In general,

teachers who had participated in professional

development in a content area were more likely

than their peers to indicate that they felt very well

prepared in that area. For example, those who

had professional development in implementing

new teaching methods were more likely than

those who did not participate to believe they were

very well prepared to implement new teaching

methods in the classroom (43 versus 34 percent).

Maintaining classroom order and discipline was

the only activity in which teacher preparedness

did not vary according to the general pattern, but

this finding may be clouded by the association

between teaching experience and participation in

professional development in classroom

management. Newer teachers were more likely to

have had recent professional development in this

content area, but they also felt least prepared to

maintain order and discipline in the classroom.

These data might suggest that attending

workshops and seminars may not be the most

effective way of developing this important

classroom expertise, since managing students

may be more easily learned in the classroom

environment and with teaching experience.

Teacher Preparedness

and Intensity of Professional

Development

Professional development is more likely to bring

about long-term change in teacher performance if

it is intense. One measure of intensity is the time

spent in the programs. The frequency of

participation in various professional development

programs was examined against the extent to

which teachers felt prepared to do various

activities in the classroom (tables 24 and B-20).

The extent to which teachers felt very well

prepared to engage in most activities increased

with the time spent in recent professional

development in that activity. For example,
—52—

Figure 24.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well prepared to do

various classroom activities, by whether they participated in professional development

activities in the last 12 months that focused on these content areas: 1998

68

43

38

33

25 23

28

74

34

20 20 17

11 14

0

20

40

60

80

100

Maintain order

and discipline in

the classroom

Implement 

new methods 

of teaching 

(e.g., cooperative learning)

Implement state

or district

curriculum and

performance

standards

Use student

performance

assessment

techniques

Address the

needs of

students with

disabilities

Integrate

educational

technology into

the grade or

subject taught

Address the

needs of

students with

limited English

proficiency or

from diverse

cultural

backgrounds

Percent

Participated

Did not participate

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

teachers who spent over 8 hours in programs in

the last 12 months that focused on the integration

of technology in classrooms were more likely

than those who spent 1 to 8 hours or those who

did not participate at all to indicate that they felt

very well prepared to meet this classroom

requirement.

The data suggest that for professional

development to achieve its goal of improving

teacher preparedness for classroom requirements,

teachers need to spend more than a day of

training in a relevant content area. The extent to

which teachers felt very well prepared for

classroom requirements did not always vary by

whether teachers spent 1 to 8 hours or did not

participate at all in relevant professional

development during the past 12 months (tables 24

and B-20). For instance, teachers who spent 1 to

8 hours in professional development programs

that focused on implementing state or district

curriculum and performance standards, did not

differ from those who had no relevant

professional development to report they felt very

well prepared to meet this classroom requirement

(33 versus 30 percent).

Teacher Preparedness and

Collaborative Activities

Teacher collaboration was identified as a second

major mechanism of on-the-job learning. To the

extent that collaborative activities provide

teachers with opportunities for on-going

development, participation in these activities

should better prepare teachers for classroom

demands. The 1998 survey data partially

supported this expectation (table 25).
—53—

Table 24.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to do

various activities in the classroom, by the number of hours spent in professional

development in the content area of the activity in the last 12 months: 1998

Content area Very well

prepared

Moderately

well

prepared

Somewhat

well

prepared

Not at all

prepared

State or district curriculum and performance standards

0 hours ............................................................................................... 30 41 22 6

1 to 8 hours ........................................................................................ 33 43 20 3

More than 8 hours.............................................................................. 44 37 17 1

Integration of educational technology into the grade or subject taught

0 hours ............................................................................................... 11 25 40 23

1 to 8 hours ........................................................................................ 17 39 37 6

More than 8 hours.............................................................................. 33 42 23 2

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)

0 hours ............................................................................................... 34 41 20 5

1 to 8 hours ........................................................................................ 38 43 17 1

More than 8 hours.............................................................................. 51 38 11 *

Student performance assessment

0 hours ............................................................................................... 20 39 32 9

1 to 8 hours ........................................................................................ 27 44 27 2

More than 8 hours.............................................................................. 45 40 14 2

Classroom management, including student discipline

0 hours ............................................................................................... 74 21 4 1

1 to 8 hours ........................................................................................ 68 27 4 1

More than 8 hours.............................................................................. 68 27 5 *

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities1

0 hours ............................................................................................... 17 37 35 11

1 to 8 hours ........................................................................................ 20 46 29 5

More than 8 hours.............................................................................. 41 38 18 2

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds1

0 hours ............................................................................................... 14 26 34 26

1 to 8 hours ........................................................................................ 21 41 30 8

More than 8 hours.............................................................................. 41 43 15 1

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1

Percents are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Common planning periods for team teaching and

regularly scheduled collaboration with other

teachers explicitly emphasize teacher exchange of

pedagogical and subject matter knowledge.

Teacher preparedness varied by recent

participation in both of these collaborative

activities (table 25). Teachers who engaged in

common planning periods for team teaching were

more likely than those who did not participate in

the activity to report that they felt very well

prepared to implement new teaching methods,

implement state and district curriculum and

performance standards, use student performance

assessment techniques, maintain order and

discipline, and address the needs of students with

disabilities. Similarly, teachers who participated

in regularly scheduled collaboration with other

teachers felt better prepared than their peers to

implement new teaching methods, implement

state or district curriculum and performance

standards, use student performance techniques,

and address the needs of students with

disabilities.

Networking with teachers outside the school was

related to teacher preparedness for most
—54—

Table 25.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well prepared to do

various classroom activities, by whether they participated in various teaching-related

activities in the last 12 months: 1998

Feel very well prepared to:

Whether teacher

participated in the

activity

Maintain

order and

discipline in

the

classroom

Implement

new

methods of

teaching

Implement

state or

district

curriculum

and

performance

standards

Use student

performance

assessment

techniques

Address the

needs of

students

with

disabilities1

Integrate

educational

technology

into the

grade or

subject

taught

Address the

needs of

students

with limited

English

proficiency

or from

diverse

cultural

backgrounds1

Common planning

period for team teachers

Yes ............................ 73 45 38 31 23 20 20

No ............................. 68 34 33 24 19 21 20

Regularly scheduled

collaboration with other

teachers, excluding

meetings held for

administrative purposes

Yes ............................ 71 43 37 30 22 21 20

No ............................. 68 33 33 33 17 18 19

Being mentored by

another teacher in a

formal relationship

Yes ............................ 61 41 39 33 19 23 23

No ............................. 73 41 36 27 22 20 19

Mentoring another

teacher in a formal

relationship

Yes ............................ 80 50 45 37 27 24 23

No ............................. 68 38 33 25 19 19 19

Networking with

teachers outside your

school

Yes ............................ 72 45 39 31 22 23 20

No ............................. 68 34 32 24 19 16 20

Individual or

collaborative research

on a topic of interest to

you professionally

Yes ............................ 73 47 40 34 23 24 22

No ............................. 68 33 32 22 19 17 17

1

Percents are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
—55—

classroom requirements, with those who recently

participated in collaborative activities more likely

to report feeling very well prepared for the

classroom demand (table 25). For example,

teachers who recently engaged in networking

with teachers outside the school were more likely

than those who did not participate to report that

they felt very well prepared to implement new

teaching methods (45 versus 34 percent) and

integrate educational technology into the grade or

subject taught (23 versus 16 percent). Similarly,

teachers who engaged in individual and

collaborative research felt better prepared than

their peers to meet most of the classroom

requirements considered in the survey.

Mentoring relationships may yield benefits for

both mentor teachers and those who are

mentored. The survey found mixed patterns on

the relation between being mentored and teacher

preparedness for various classroom demands

(table 25). Teacher preparedness for a few

classroom requirements differed by whether

teachers were mentored. Teachers who were

mentored felt better prepared than their peers to

use student performance techniques (33 versus 27

percent) and address the needs of limited English

proficient or culturally diverse students (23 versus

19 percent) but less likely to report feeling very

well prepared to maintain order and discipline in

the classroom (61 versus 73 percent). Moreover,

being mentored was not related to teacher

preparedness for the other four classroom

requirements examined in the survey. One

possible interpretation of these findings is being

mentored may not necessarily contribute to

teachers feeling better prepared for classroom

demands. However, the findings may also be

clouded by the influence of teaching experience

on whether or not teachers were mentored. As

discussed earlier, for example, newer teachers

were far more likely than more experienced

teachers to be mentored, but they also felt less

prepared for classroom management.

In contrast to teachers who were mentored, those

who served as mentors were more likely than

their peers to report that they felt very well

prepared for six of seven classroom requirements

examined in the survey (table 25). Again, these

patterns may be clouded by the influence of

teaching experience, since experienced teachers

were more likely than newer teachers to serve as

mentors.

Summary

Teachers’ feelings of preparedness are one

important indicator of the extent to which they are

prepared to meet the challenges that characterize

their profession. Results presented in this report

indicate that a majority of teachers felt either

“moderately” or “somewhat” well prepared for

most classroom requirements; relatively few

teachers felt “very well prepared” for many of the

activities. Although a majority of the teachers

felt very well prepared to manage classrooms and

41 percent felt very well prepared to implement

new teaching methods, less than a third felt very

well prepared to integrate educational technology

or to address the needs of students with limited

English proficiency or from culturally diverse

backgrounds, or with disabilities.

Teachers’ feelings of preparedness may also

provide insight into the extent to which

opportunities for continued learning prepare them

to teach. For example, do teachers who recently

participated in formal professional development

activities or in collaborative activities actually

feel more prepared for various classroom

requirements than their peers? Results presented

in this section suggest that participation in the

activities yielded some positive outcomes for

teacher preparedness.

In general, teachers who recently participated in

formal professional development felt better

prepared than their peers for most classroom

demands. Moreover, teachers’ feeling of

preparedness increased significantly with the

number of hours spent in professional

development activities. However, preparedness

for classroom demands did not always vary by

whether teachers spent less than 8 hours or did

not participate at all in formal professional

development, suggesting that the duration of

exposure to opportunities for learning may be an

important consideration.

Teachers who recently engaged in various

collaborative activities also felt better prepared

than their peers to meet most classroom demands.

For example, those who had common planning
—56—

periods for team teaching felt better equipped

than their peers to address many of the classroom

demands examined in the survey. In contrast,

being mentored did not always yield similar

benefits; for example, teachers who were

mentored felt less prepared than their peers to

maintain order and discipline in the classroom.

However, this finding may be clouded by the fact

that newer teachers were far more likely to be

mentored than more experienced teachers, but

they also felt less prepared to manage classrooms.
—57—

6. CONCLUSIONS

This report began with the statement that a

national profile of teacher quality is a necessary

tool for tracking our progress toward the goal of

providing every child with a high-quality teacher.

As suggested, however, providing a national

profile of teacher quality is not an easy task.

Teacher quality is a complex phenomenon,

defined and measured in a variety of ways. An

overview of this complexity was provided in the

first chapter of this report.

In this study, teacher quality was defined as

teachers’ preparation and qualifications, as well

as the environments in which they work. Teacher

quality was measured using a large-scale survey

administered to a nationally representative sample

of full-time public school teachers. The

framework for organizing this report began with a

description of different types of full-time public

school teacher learning, continued with a

consideration of the support teachers receive in

their schools and communities, and ended with a

discussion of teachers’ feelings of preparedness.

This was based on the assumption that the

preparation of high-quality teachers begins prior

to entering their own classrooms (e.g., their

formal postsecondary training) and continues

once they are on the job (e.g., their participation

in professional development activities). In

addition, teacher learning and preparation are

enhanced in environments that support their

learning and work. Finally, teachers’ feelings of

preparedness were included because they are one

important indicator of the extent to which

teachers’ training has prepared them to meet the

challenges that characterize their profession.

Results of the 1998 survey address some of the

major concerns regarding teacher quality. The

data on preservice learning indicate that full-time

public school teachers possess many of the basic

prerequisites for teaching—advanced degrees and

the appropriate certification and education. For

example, virtually all the teachers had a

bachelor’s degree and about half had a master’s

degree. Two-thirds of high school teachers and

44 percent of middle school teachers majored in

an academic field. Moreover, most of the

teachers were fully certified in the field of their

main teaching assignment.

Despite the fact that the measure of out-of-field

teaching used in this report is conservative—it

only includes teachers’ main teaching

assignments in core fields—the results indicate

that a number of educators were teaching out of

field. For example, the percent of teachers in

grades 9 through 12 who reported having an

undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their

main teaching assignment field was 90 percent

for mathematics teachers, 94 percent for science

teachers, and 96 percent for teachers in

English/language arts, social studies/social

science, and foreign language. This means that

10 percent of mathematics teachers, 6 percent of

science teachers, and 4 percent of English/

language arts, foreign language, and social

studies/social science teachers in grades 9 through

12 were teaching out of field. The percent of

teachers who reported having an undergraduate or

graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field was significantly lower for

teachers of grades 7 through 12 than for teachers

of grades 9 through 12 for mathematics (82

percent), science (88 percent), English/language

arts (86 percent), and social studies/social

sciences (89 percent), indicating that teachers in

grades 7 and 8 are less likely to be teaching in

field than are teachers in grades 9 through 12.

The data suggest that most teachers participate in

activities that provide opportunities for continued

learning: almost all teachers had recently

participated in at least one formal professional

development activity and one teachercollaboration activity. Teachers were more likely

to have had professional development on topics

that emphasize curricula and pedagogical shifts in

education, including the implementation of state

or district curricula, the integration of technology

into classroom instruction, and the implementation of new teaching methods. Typically,

participation in professional development

activities lasted 1 to 8 hours. Moreover,

increased time spent in an activity was

consistently associated with the perception of
—58—

significant improvements in teaching. Similarly,

teachers who participated more frequently in

collaborative activities were more likely than

those who participated less frequently, or did not

participate at all, to report that the experience

improved their teaching “a lot.”

Results of the 1998 survey suggest that in many

respects, teachers work in supportive

environments. For example, most teachers

reported feelings of support from other teachers

and the school administration, and most of them

felt that school goals and priorities were clear.

However, the data also indicate aspects of

teachers’ work environments that can be

improved. On the issue of providing formal

support for teachers during their early years of

teaching, the survey found that two-thirds of

America’s teachers had not participated in an

induction program, although participation was

higher for new teachers than for more

experienced teachers. Moreover, teachers

perceived less parental than collegial and school

support. For example, one-third of teachers

agreed strongly that parents support their work,

although higher levels of parental support were

perceived by elementary school teachers than

high school teachers, and by teachers in schools

with the lowest concentration of poverty

compared to those with the highest concentration

of poverty.

 Finally, results presented in this report indicate

that although a majority of teachers felt “very

well prepared” to manage classrooms, and 41

percent felt very well prepared to implement new

teaching methods, relatively few teachers felt

very well prepared for other core classroom

requirements. In particular, about 20 percent of

the teachers felt very well prepared for classroom

requirements that have most recently become part

of the repertoire of expectations for effective

teaching: integrating educational technology, or

addressing the needs of students with limited

English proficiency or from culturally diverse

backgrounds, or those with disabilities.

This national profile of teacher quality provides

important information regarding the preparation

and qualifications of American teachers—their

preservice learning, teaching assignment, opportunities for continued learning, work environment, and feelings of preparedness. However,

this study does not address concerns raised by

individuals such as Mandel (1996, p. 3-31); that

is, that the indicators presented in this report

“provide only the most modest threshold of

confidence regarding the quality of practice in the

nation’s schools.” In conjunction with the

Education Statistics Services Institute (ESSI) and

a team of nationally regarded experts, the

National Center for Education Statistics is

currently involved in developing measures of

teaching practices. Future plans may include

combining efforts to provide a profile of teacher

quality that includes both teacher preparation and

qualifications and teaching practices.
—59—

References

Achilles, C.M. (1996). Students achieve more in smaller classes. Educational Leadership, 53(3), 76-77.

Address Before the Congress on the State of the Union. (1997, February 4). White House Electronic

Publications. [online]. http//:www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-es/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/

1997/2/5/6.text1.

Annual Back to School Address to the National Press Club. (1998, September). Remarks as prepared for

delivery by the U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley. [online].

http://www.ed.gov/Speeches/980915.html.

Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation. (1997). Overview of teacher induction policy and practice:

Results of the exploratory survey. (Issue brief No. 97-HR-01.1). Washington, DC: Asian-Pacific

Economic Cooperation.

Ball, D.L. (1990). Reflections and deflections of policy: The case of Carol Turner. Educational

Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 263-275.

Ball, D.L. (1996). Teacher learning and the mathematics reforms: What we think we know and what we

need to learn. Phi Delta Kappan, (March), 500-508.

Ball, D.L., and Wilson, S.M. (1996). Integrity in teaching: Recognizing the fusion of the moral and

intellectual. American Educational Research Journal, 33(1), 155-192.

Ballou, D., and Podgursky, M. (1997). Reforming teacher training and recruitment. Government Union

Review, 17(4), 1-47.

Ballou, D., and Podgursky, M. (1998). The case against teacher certification. Public Interest, 132, 17-

29.

Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. (1986). Task Force on Teaching as a profession. A

nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century. New York: Carnegie Corporation.

Cohen, D.K. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation

and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 327-345.

Council of Chief State School Officers. (1998). Key state education policies on K-12 education.

Washington, DC: CCSSO.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching: Testing policy hypotheses from a national

commission report. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 5-15.

Darling-Hammond, L., and McLaughlin, M.V. (1996). Policies that support professional development in

an era of reform. In Teacher learning: New policies and practices, edited by M.V. McLaughlin and

I. Oberman. New York: Teachers College Press.

Directive on Info Sharing: Promoting Excellence and Accountability in Teaching. (1996, September 12).

White House Electronic Publications. [online]. http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/urires/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/1996/9/12/1.text.1.
—60—

Education and Training Priorities for the Fall. (1998, August 31). [online]. http://www.ed.gov/

PressReleases/08-1998.wh-0831.html.

Ferguson, R.F. (1990). Racial patterns in how school and teacher quality affect achievement and

earnings. Dallas: Meadows Foundation.

Finn, J., and Achilles, C.M. (1990). Answers and questions about class size: a statewide experiment.

American Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 557-577.

Fullan, M., with Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York:

Teacher’s College Press.

Galvez-Hjornevik, C. (1986). Mentoring among teachers: A review of literature. (Report No.

SP026700). Austin, TX: Journal of Teacher Education. (ERIC No. ED 262 032).

Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In Handbook of

research on teacher education, edited by J.P Sikula, T.J. Buttery, and E. Guyton. New York:

Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Holmes Group. (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers. East Lansing, MI: The Holmes Group, Inc.

Ingersoll, R. (June 1998). The problem of out-of-field teaching. [online].

http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/king9806.htm.

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (1995). INTASC Core Standards. [online].

http://develop.ccsso.cybercentral.com/intascst.htm.

Jones, V. (1996). Classroom management. In Handbook of research on teacher education, edited by J.P

Sikula, T.J. Buttery, and E. Guyton. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

King, S.H., and Bey, T.M. The need for urban teacher mentors. Education and Urban Society, 28, (1), 3-

10.

Kruse, S.M., Lewis, K., and Bryk, A. (1994). Building professional community in schools. (Issue report

No. 6). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center on Organization and

Restructuring of Schools.

Leinhardt, G. (1989). Math lessons: A contrast of novice and expert competence. Journal for Research in

Mathematics Education, 20(1), 52-75.

Mandel, D.R. (1996). Teacher education, training, and staff development: Implications for national

surveys. In Conference proceedings. From data to information: New directions for the National

Center for Education Statistics, edited by G. Hoachlander, J.E. Griffith, and J.H. Ralph. NCES 96-

901. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

McLaughlin, M.W., and Oberman, I. (1996). (Eds). Teacher learning: New policies and practices. New

York: Teachers College Press.

National Association of Secondary School Principals. (1996). Breaking ranks: Changing an American

institution. Reston, VA: NASSP.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (1998). What teachers should know and be able to

do. [online]. http://www.nbpts.org/nbpts/standards/intro.html.
—61—

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for

America’s future. New York: NCTAF.

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in

quality teaching. New York: NCTAF.

Newmann. F.M. (1994). School-wide professional community. (Issue Report No. 6). Madison, WI:

University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.

Odden, A. (1990). Class size and student achievement: Research-based policy alternatives. Educational

Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(2), 213-227.

Peterson, P.L. (1990). Doing more in the same amount of time: Cathy Swift. Educational Evaluation and

Policy Analysis, 12(3), 277-296.

Ravitch, D. Lesson plan for teachers. The Washington Post, 10 August 1998, p. A17.

Sizer, T.R. (1992). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston, MA:

Houghton Mifflin Co.

Sprinthall, N.A., Reiman, A.J., and Theis-Sprinthall, L. (1996). Teacher professional development. In

Handbook of research on teacher education, edited by J.P Sikula, T.J. Buttery, and E. Guyton.

New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Stodolsky, S.S. (1984). Teacher evaluation: The limits of looking. Educational Researcher, 13(9), 11-18.

Stodolsky, S.S. (1996). Should SASS measure instructional processes and teacher effectiveness? In The

Schools and Staffing Survey: Recommendations for the future, edited by J. Mullins and D.

Kasprzyk. NCES 97-597. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Stodolsky, S.S., and Grossman, P.L. (1995). The impact of subject matter on curricular activity: An

analysis of five academic subjects. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 227-249.

Sykes, G. (1990). Organizing policy into practice: Reactions to the cases. Educational Evaluation and

Policy Analysis, 12(3), 243-247.

Talbert, J.E., and McLaughlin, M.W. (1993). Understanding teaching in context. In Teaching for

understanding: Challenges for policy and practice, edited by D.K. Cohen, M.W. McLaughlin, and

J.E. Talbert, pp. 1-10. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

U.S. Department of Education. (1988). Class size and public policy: Politics and panaceas,

by T. Tomlinson. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. (1994a). Strong families, strong schools. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1994b). Qualifications of the

public school teacher workforce: 1988 and 1991. Statistical Analysis Report No. 95-665, by S.A.

Bobbitt and M.M. McMillen. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996a). National assessments of

teacher quality. Working Paper No. 96-24, by Richard M. Ingersoll. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.
—62—

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996b). Out-of-field teaching

and educational equality. Statistical Analysis Report No. 96-040, by Richard M. Ingersoll.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996c). Are high school

teachers teaching core subjects without college majors or minors in those subjects? Issue Brief

IB-1-96, NCES 96-839, by Richard M. Ingersoll. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Education.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). America’s teachers:

Profile of a profession, 1993-94. NCES 97-460, by R.R. Henke, S.P. Choy, X. Chen, S. Geis,

M.N. Alt, and S.P. Brougham. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998a). The TIMSS videotape

classroom study: Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth-grade

mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States. Research and Development

Report No. 98-047, by James W. Stigler, Patrick Gonzales, Takako Kawanaka, Steffen Knoll, and

Ana Serrano. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998b). School policies and

practices affecting instruction in mathematics. NCES 98-495, by E.F. Hawkins, F. Stancavage,

and J.A. Dossey. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998c). Toward better

teaching professional development in 1993-94. Statistical Analysis Report No. 98-230, by S.

Choy, X. Chen, and M. Ross. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (forthcoming). What happens

in classrooms? Elementary and secondary school instruction, 1994-95, by R.R. Henke, X. Chen,

and G. Golman. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Westerman, D.A. (1991). Expert and novice teacher decision making. Journal of Teacher Education,

42(4), 292-305.

Wise, A.E., Darling-Hammond, L., McLaughlin, M.W., and Bernstein, H.T. (1984). Teacher evaluation:

A study of effective practices. (Report No. R-3139-NIE). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand

Corporation.

Word, E., Achilles, C., Bain, H.P., Folger, J., Johnston, J., and Lintz, M.N. (1990). The state of

Tennessee's student/teacher ratio (STAR) project: Technical report. Nashville, TN: Tennessee

Department of Education.
—63—

Suggested Readings

Achilles, C.M. (1996) Students achieve more in smaller classes. Educational Leadership, 53(3), 76-77.

This article reviews Tennessee’s Student/Teacher Ratio Project research, which found significant

educational benefits for children enrolled in smaller classes. The author cites many of the specific

benefits of smaller classes, such as increased attention for students, friendlier classes, and fewer

discipline problems.

Address Before the Congress on the State of the Union. ( 1997, February 4). White House Electronic

Publications. [online]. http//:www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-es/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/

1997/2/5/6.text.1.

In his 1997 State of the Union Address, President Clinton issued a “Call to Action,” stressing new

commitment to reshaping and refocusing American schools. The speech reflects the growing

concern over the shortage of quality teachers.

Annual Back to School Address to the National Press Club. (1998, September). Remarks as prepared for

delivery by the U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley. [online].

http://www.ed.gov/Speeches/980915.html.

Riley’s speech discusses the current problems and future trends that face schools. The most

pressing is described as the “baby-boom echo,” which has led to record numbers in national

enrollment and reinforces the need for more quality teachers.

Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation. (1997). Overview of teacher induction policy and practice: results

of the exploratory survey. (Issue brief No. 97-HR-01.1). Washington, DC: Asian-Pacific

Economic Cooperation.

Authors Jay Moskowitz and Maria Stephens report on the state of policy and practice in teacher

induction programs among Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation members.

Ball, D.L. (1990). Reflections and deflections of policy: The case of Carol Turner. Educational

Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 263-275.

The article examines the teaching practices of one educator, showing how her approach both

adheres to and circumvents the curriculum framework established by the state.

Ball, D.L. (1996). Teacher learning and the mathematics reforms: What we think we know and what we

need to learn. Phi Delta Kappan, (March), 500-508.

Using classroom observations, this paper highlights the importance of two important aspects of

teaching. The authors argue that effective teaching must address both moral concerns and

pedagogical content knowledge.
—64—

Ball, D.L., and Wilson, S.M. (1996). Integrity in teaching: Recognizing the fusion of the moral and

intellectual. American Educational Research Journal, 33(1), 155-192.

The article focuses on teachers' learning process. It argues that school reform will not be fully

enacted until reformers have a better understanding of how teachers learn. Only then can new

standards and reforms be successfully implemented.

Ballou, D., and Podgursky, M. (1997). Reforming teacher training and recruitment. Government Union

Review, 17(4), 1-47.

Ballou, D., and Podgursky, M. (1998). The case against teacher certification. Public Interest, 132, 17-

29.

The authors provide critical look at the recommendations for changes in the teacher training

process put forth by the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (NCTAF) in a

1996 report. The authors argue that more extensive training will not lead to an increase in the

quality of teachers.

Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. (1986). Task Force on teaching as a profession. A

nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century. New York: Carnegie Corporation.

The Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy calls for sweeping changes in education

policy in an effort to redefine the essential standards of American education. Ideas such as

restructuring schools, the development of a professional curriculum for teacher preparation

programs, and new requirements for the teacher certification are described.

Center for Education Reform. (1998). Fifteen years after A Nation at Risk. [online].

http://edreform.com/pubs/manifest.htm.

This document compares and discusses data gathered on characteristics of the education system

and discussed in the 1983 report by the National Commission on Excellence in Education, A

Nation at Risk, to data collected in the same areas in 1998. The report ends with ten recommended

changes in education for the next century.

Cohen, D.K. (1990). A revolution in one classroom: The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation

and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 327-345.

This paper investigates the teaching practices of one elementary school teacher, who claims to have

altered her instruction methods in response to a new state policy. The article explores which

aspects of the policy the teacher has adopted and which she has rejected.

Council of Chief State School Officers. (1998). Key state education policies on K-12 education.

Washington, DC: CCSSO.

This report is part of a continuing series by the CCSSO created to inform policymakers and

educators on the current status of key policies in education that shape and define education in

American public schools.
—65—

Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching: testing policy hypotheses from a national

commission report. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 5-15.

Darling-Hammond analyzes the NCTAF’s 1996 report on problems present in current teacher

training programs.

Darling-Hammond, L., and McLaughlin, M.V. (1996). Policies that support professional development in

an era of reform. In Teacher learning: New policies and practices, edited by M.V. McLaughlin and

I. Oberman. New York: Teachers College Press.

Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin explore the practice and policy of staff development in terms

of recent developments in teacher learning.

Directive on Info Sharing: Promoting Excellence and Accountability in Teaching. (1996, September 12).

White House Electronic Publications. [online]. http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/urires/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/1996/9/12/1.text.1.

In this memorandum to the Secretary of Education, the President focuses on the need for highquality teachers in national schools. A reward system for good teachers, tougher licensing and

certification measures, and removal of incompetent teachers are some of the standards

recommended in this effort.

Education and Training Priorities for the Fall. (1998, August 31). [online].

http://www.ed.gov/PressReleases/08-1998/wh-0831.html.

In a press release, the education and training priorities for the year’s remaining congressional

session are presented and outlined. The President’s commitment to reducing class sizes by

providing more well-prepared teachers in the early grades is highlighted.

Feiman-Nemser, S. (1996). Teacher mentoring: A critical review. Washington, DC: ERIC Digest.

(ERIC ED 397060).

This article discusses the growth of mentoring, the obstacles to realizing the potential of mentoring

as a method of reform, needed research, and selected issues of policy and practice.

Feistritzer, C.E. ( 1996). Profiles of teachers in the U.S. Washington, DC: National Center for

Education Information.

The report presents the findings of an ongoing survey conducted by the National Center for

Education Information in an effort to gain better understanding of teachers and the teaching

profession.

Ferguson, R.F. (1990). Racial patterns in how school and teacher quality affect achievement and

earnings. Dallas: Meadows Foundation.

Ferguson examines findings of the Texas examination of administrators and teachers. Ferguson

finds that student performance is improved by teachers with strong language skill, classrooms with

18 or fewer students, teachers with more experience, and teachers with master’s degrees.
—66—

Finn, J., and Achilles, C.M. (1990). Answers and questions about class size: a statewide experiment.

American Educational Research Journal, 27(3), 557-577.

Finn and Achilles discuss the results of an experiment involving kindergarten students. Students

and teachers were randomly assigned to small and large classes within participating schools.

Students remained in these classes for 2 years, with testing done at the end of each year in math

and reading. Longitudinal analysis of a portion of the sample indicated that students in smaller

classes outperformed those in regular size kindergarten classes.

Fox, J. (1995). Teacher incubation time cut back in California. Education Daily, 5 October, 1-2.

Fox explains the change in California law in response to the state’s teacher shortage that allows

colleges to develop 4-year interdisciplinary majors combining liberal arts instruction with

education training. Previously, the state prohibited universities from offering extensive teacher

preparation, mandating that such training be part of a fifth year of study.

Fullan, M., with Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York:

Teacher’s College Press.

Fullan and Steigelbauer argue that teacher education should be viewed as a career-long proposition

in the effort to move toward effective education reform.

Galvez-Hjornevik, C. (1986). Mentoring among teachers: A review of literature. (Report No.

SP026700). Austin, TX: Journal of Teacher Education. (ERIC No. ED 262 032).

The author reviews prior studies of mentoring relationships and identifies the characteristics of

successful mentor-protégé interaction.

Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In Handbook of

research on teacher education, edited by J.P Sikula, T.J. Buttery, and E. Guyton. New York:

Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Gold discusses the importance of early and continuous support to beginning teachers in preventing

attrition and burnout and promoting retention and career satisfaction.

Holmes Group. (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers. East Lansing, MI: The Holmes Group, Inc.

The Holmes Group report outlines the organization’s goals for the reform of teacher education.

The group states that their first goal, “to make the education of teachers intellectually more solid,”

is a critical step in reforming the education system.

Ingersoll, R. (June 1998). The problem of out-of-field teaching. [online]

http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/king9806.htm.

Ingersoll presents the consideration of out-of-field teaching as a critical issue in the American

education system.
—67—

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (1995). INTASC Core Standards. [online].

http://develop.ccsso.cybercentral.com/intascst.htm.

This document lists the INTASC core standards for granting licenses to new teachers and serves as

a framework for the reform of teacher preparation and professional development. These principles

represent characteristics that the group feels should be present in all teaching regardless of the

subject or grade level taught.

Jones, V. (1996). Classroom management. In Handbook of research on teacher education, edited by J.P

Sikula, T.J. Buttery, and E. Guyton. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Jones examines the role of classroom management in teacher effectiveness. The author calls for

studies to explore various approaches in educating teachers in this area.

King, S.H., and Bey, T.M. (1995). The need for urban teacher mentors. Education and Urban Society,

28, (1), 3-10.

The authors focus on the potential for urban teachers to improve their teaching through mentoring

support.

Kruse, S.M., Lewis, K., and Bryk, A. (1994). Building professional community in schools. (Issue report

No. 6). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center on Organization and

Restructuring of Schools.

The authors call for an attention shift in education reform toward the creation of a professional

community founded on encouragement and support for teachers.

Leinhardt, G. (1986). The cognitive skill of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 75-95.

This article characterizes teaching as a complex cognitive skill that can be analyzed in a manner

similar to other skills described by cognitive psychology. Elementary mathematics instruction by

both expert and novice teachers is examined based on the theory that teaching skill is built on two

fundamental knowledge systems: lesson structure and subject matter.

Leinhardt, G. (1989). Math lessons: A contrast of novice and expert competence. Journal for Research in

Mathematics Education, 20(1), 52-75.

Leinhardt compares the teaching practices exhibited by expert teachers to those of novice teachers.

The results of this comparison highlight the nature of the competencies that expert teachers possess

and suggest some areas of instruction for future teachers.

Little, J.W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. (Report No.

SP035393). New York: NCREST. (ERIC No. ED 373 049).

Little argues that professional development focused primarily on expanding an individual's

repertoire of classroom skills is not adequate achieve reform in education.
—68—

Mandel, D.R. (1996). Teacher education, training, and staff development: Implications for national

surveys. In Conference proceedings. From data to information: New directions for the National

Center for Education Statistics, edited by G. Hoachlander, J.E. Griffith, and J.H. Ralph. NCES 96-

901. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

This document summarizes discussion intended to aid planning for NCES future activities

specifically in areas of substance, technology, and methodology of data collection, analysis, and

dissemination. Mandel believes that consensus about what teachers should know and be able to do

in the classroom is necessary for effective reform.

McLaughlin, M.W., and Oberman, I. (1996). (Eds). Teacher learning: New policies and practices. New

York: Teachers College Press.

McLaughlin and Oberman focus on the practice and policy of staff development in terms of recent

developments in teacher learning.

National Association of Secondary School Principals. (1996). Breaking ranks: Changing an American

institution. Reston, VA: NASSP.

The report focuses on revitalizing education for all students and points to what is needed for the

21st century high school. Eighty recommendations are presented in the effort to ensure that every

student receives a complete, student-centered, and high quality education.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (1998). What teachers should know and be able to

do. [online]. http://www.nbpts.org/nbpts/standards/intro.html.

This publication details the National Board’s vision of excellence in teaching. High and rigorous

standards for what teachers should know and be able to do are incorporated into a voluntary

certification system created by the organization.

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for

America’s future. New York: NCTAF.

The NCTAF attempts to provide “a blueprint for recruiting, preparing, and supporting excellent

teachers in all of America’s schools” in this report.

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing

in quality teaching. New York: NCTAF.

A followup to the Commission’s What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future, this report

revisits previous recommendations, offers new data about how investments in teaching improve

student achievement, and gives an overview of the nation’s progress toward quality teaching.

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (1997). Introduction to draft accreditation

standards for candidates in elementary teacher programs. [online].

http://www.ncate.org/projects/npt/PSDPstds.html.

This Council draft supports the group’s commitment to developing performance-based

expectations for teacher preparation aligned with other organizations focusing on reforming teacher

quality.
—69—

Nelson, B.S., and Hammerman, J.K. (1996). Reconceptualizing teaching: Moving toward the creation of

intellectual communities of students, teachers and teacher educators. In Teacher learning: New

policies and practices, edited by M.W. McLaughlin and I. Oberman. New York: Teachers College

Press.

Nelson and Hammerman call for a movement toward conceiving teaching as an intellectual, rather

than technical, endeavor. Innovative professional development programs are identified as the

catalysts to this movement.

Newmann, F.M. (1992) Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools. New

York: Teachers College Press.

Newmann presents findings from research from five projects conducted by the National Center on

Effective Secondary Schools.

Newmann, F.M. (1994). School-wide professional community. (Issue Report No. 6). Madison, WI:

University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.

In this article, the author considers the issue of collaboration among school staff. He summarizes

the barriers to collaboration, offers a vision of the effective school community, and provides

examples of schools that have restructured to develop their professional communities.

Newmann, F.M., Marks, H.M., and Gamoran, A. (1995). Authentic pedagogy and student performance.

Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April,

San Francisco, CA.

The authors argue that although important distinctions may be made between progressive, studentcentered, and constructivist teaching, they all are grounded in emphasis on active learning.

Newmann, F.M., Secada, W.G., and Wehlage, G.G. (1995). A guide to authentic instruction and

assessment: Vision, standards, and scoring. Madison. WI: Wisconsin Center for Education

Research.

The authors attempt to develop standards for judging the intellectual quality of schoolwork,

regardless of the form of teaching and assessment techniques used. Researchers observed over 700

lessons in 24 schools in this effort.

Newmann, F.M., and Wehlage, G.G. (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational

Leadership, 50(7), 8-12.

Newmann and Wehlage argue that innovations alone will not lead to improved achievement.

Authentic instruction is divided into five standard categories: higher order thinking, depth of

knowledge, connectedness of the work, substantive conversation, and social support for student

achievement.
—70—

Odden, A. (1990). Class size and student achievement: Research-based policy alternatives. Educational

Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(2), 213-227.

Odden reviews literature on the relation between class size and student achievement and suggests

policy alternatives. Class size reduction strategies are proposed for primary and secondary

instruction.

Peterson, P.L. (1990). Doing more in the same amount of time: Cathy Swift. Educational Evaluation and

Policy Analysis, 12(3), 277-296.

Peterson examines the perspectives and practices of an elementary mathematics teacher in relation

to the educator’s knowledge and beliefs, tangled layers of policy, and multiple uncertainties and

conflicts.

Promising Practices: New ways to improve teacher quality. (1998). [online].

http://www.ed.gov/PromPractice.

This publication by the Department of Education considers several ideas for improving the quality

teachers in American schools. Recruitment, preparation, new licensing and certification standards,

and improved professional development are major areas explored.

Ravitch, D. Lesson plan for teachers. The Washington Post, 10 August, 1998, p. A17.

In an editorial, the author suggests that improvements in the education of teachers must be made.

Future teachers should have an academic major in the subject that they intend to teach.

Schwartz, J., and Warren, P. (1997). Class size reduction. [online].

http://www.lao.ca.gov/class_size_297.html.

In a report prepared for the California Legislative Analyst’s Office, results on findings from a study

on the state’s class size reduction program are presented.

Sizer, T.R. (1992). Horace’s compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston, MA:

Houghton Mifflin Co.

This book urges renewed public attention to the importance of teaching in high schools and to the

complexity and subtlety of being an educator. Sizer supports the belief that the abilities and

methods of the teachers in a school are of great importance.

Sprinthall, N.A., Reiman, A.J., and Theis-Sprinthall, L. (1996). Teacher professional development. In

Handbook of research on teacher education, edited by J.P Sikula, T.J. Buttery, and E. Guyton.

New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Sprinthall, Reiman, and Theis-Sprinthall focus on the emergence of teacher development as a

pressing issue in education and review existing research on the subject.
—71—

Stodolsky, S.S. (1984). Teacher evaluation: The limits of looking. Educational Researcher, 13(9), 11-

18.

Stodolsky reviews current practices in teacher evaluation with particular focus on observation. The

author maintains that limitations in the use of observation must be acknowledged and addressed in

teacher evaluation settings.

Stodolsky, S.S. (1996). Should SASS measure instructional processes and teacher effectiveness? In The

schools and staffing survey: Recommendations for the future. NCES Report 97-596, by John

Mullens and Daniel Kasprzyk. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center

for Education Statistics.

The author addresses data collection on instructional practices and teacher effectiveness. Stodolsky

also examines how teacher effectiveness is conceptualized.

Stodolsky, S.S., and Grossman, P.L. (1995). The impact of subject matter on curricular activity: An

analysis of five academic subjects. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 227-249.

This article tests the framework connecting subject matter with curricular activities among high

school teachers of five academic subjects. The concepts of subject matter and curricular activities

of English, social studies, science, math, and foreign language teachers in 16 high schools are

compared.

Sweeney, B.W. (1994). A new teacher mentoring knowledge base. [online].

http://www.mentors.net/Library Files/Knowlbase.html.

Sweeney shares his ideas on mentoring as a professional development activity. Roles and tasks of

mentors, expectations and matching of mentors and proteges, selection of mentors, and other topics

are discussed.

Sykes, G. (1990). Licensure and certification of teachers: An appraisal. In The new handbook of teacher

evaluation assessing elementary and secondary school teachers, edited by J. Millman and L.

Darling-Hammond, pp. 62-75. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.

Sykes considers the controversy surrounding agreement on the minimum qualifications associated

with the issuance of teaching credentials.

Talbert, J.E., and McLaughlin, M.W. (1993). Understanding teaching in context. In Teaching for

understanding: Challenges for policy and practice, edited by D.K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin, and

J. E. Talbert, pp. 1-10. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Using the “teaching for understanding concept” as an example, the authors discuss the challenges

that reform efforts face inside and outside of schools.

U.S. Department of Education. (1988). Class size and public policy: Politics and panaceas,

by T. Tomlinson. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Tomlinson reviews the issue of class size reduction. Data from research on the subject are

analyzed in search of a relationship between class size and educational improvement. The author

cites findings supporting the view that the costs of class size reduction outweigh the benefits.
—72—

U.S. Department of Education. (1994). Strong families, strong schools. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

This document examines the role of families play in the education of children. The results of

previous research and possible aspects of modern life that prevent and limit family involvement are

discussed.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1994). Qualifications of the

public school teacher workforce: 1988 and 1991. Statistical Analysis Report No. 95-665, by S.A.

Bobbitt and M.M. McMillen. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This report examines the qualifications of public school teachers based on their field of

certification and college major or minor, with particular emphasis on the extent of out-of-field

teaching.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1995). Teacher supply in the

United States: Sources of newly hired teachers in public and private schools, 1988-1991.

Statistical Analysis Report No. 95-348, by M.R. Rollefson and S.P. Broughman. Washington, DC:

National Center for Education Statistics.

This report provides analysis of data from the 1991 SASS on newly hired teachers. The changes in

rates of entry, qualifications, and characteristics of new entrants are compared with 1988 SASS

data.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). National assessments of

teacher quality. Working Paper No. 96-24, by R.M. Ingersoll. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

This NCES paper addresses the subject of teacher quality. An outline of issues and questions in

this area, a review of the predominant approaches to assessing teacher quality, and an alternative

to current assessment methods are provided.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Out-of-field teaching and

educational equality. Statistical Analysis Report No. 96-040, by Richard M. Ingersoll.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This report presents national data on the extent to which students in the nation's public secondary

schools are taught by teachers without basic qualifications in their assigned teaching fields. It seeks

to address the question of whether inequalities exist in the distribution of adequately qualified

teachers across and within different schools in the United States.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Are high school

teachers teaching core subjects without college majors or minors in those subjects? Issue Brief

IB-1-96, NCES 96-839, by Richard M. Ingersoll. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Education.

In this NCES Issue Brief, Ingersoll reports the percent of public and private high school teachers

teaching at least one core curriculum subject without a college major or minor in the subject.
—73—

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). America’s teachers:

Profile of a profession, 1993-94. NCES 97-460, by R.R. Henke, S.P. Choy, X. Chen, S. Geis,

M.N. Alt, and S.P. Brougham. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This report addresses a wide range of topics related to teachers and teaching in the United States.

Topics include teachers' demographic characteristics and various characteristics of their schools

and students; teachers' preparation and professional development experiences, their workloads,

teaching practices, compensation, satisfaction with and opinions regarding their working

conditions, and the supply and demand of teachers.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Characteristics of

stayers, movers, and leavers: results from the teacher follow-up survey: 1994-95. Report No. 97-

450, by S.D. Whitener, K.J. Gruber, H. Lynch, K. Tingoes, M. Perona, and S. Fondelier.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This report presents national data on the extent to which students in the nations’ public secondary

schools are taught by teachers without basic qualifications in their assigned teaching fields. It seeks

to address the question of whether inequalities exist in the distribution of adequately qualified

teachers across and within different schools in the United States.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). Projections of education

statistics to 2007. Report No. 97-382, by D.E. Gerald and W.J. Hussar. Washington, DC: NCES.

This report provides projections for key education statistics on enrollment, graduates, classroom

teachers, and expenditures in elementary and secondary schools.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). Parent involvement in

children’s education: Efforts by public elementary schools. Statistical Analysis Report No. 98-032,

by N. Carey, L. Lewis, and E. Farris. Washington, DC: NCES.

This report presents data from a study designed to provide information on the ways that schools

engage parents in their children’s education. The ways in which parents respond to available

opportunities for involvement is also explored.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). School policies and

practices affecting instruction in mathematics. NCES 98-495, by E.F. Hawkins, F. Stancavage,

and J.A. Dossey. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This report describes the educational policies and practices affecting instruction in mathematics,

with particular attention to the relationship between these policies and practices and student

performance on the NAEP mathematics assessment.
—74—

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). The TIMSS videotape

classroom study: Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth-grade

mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States. Research and Development

Report No. 98-047, by James W. Stigler, Patrick Gonzales, Takako Kawanaka, Steffen Knoll, and

Ana Serrano. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This report discusses the data from the TIMSS attempt to collect videotaped records of classroom

instruction from national representative samples of teachers. The project centers on better

understanding of how the processes of classroom instruction in different cultures will contribute to

efforts to improve student learning in school.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). Toward better teaching

professional development in 1993-94. Statistical Analysis Report No. 98-230, by S. Choy, X.

Chen, and M. Ross. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This report examines who determines the content, duration, and format of professional

development programs for teachers. Focus is also placed on whether the opportunity for quality

assessment of professional development programs are given to teachers.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (forthcoming). What happens

in classrooms? Elementary and secondary school instruction, 1994-95, by R.R. Henke, X. Chen,

and G. Golman. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

This publication reports on the teaching practices of elementary and secondary school teachers.

Using data compiled in a national survey of teachers, the report assesses the variation in instruction

strategies among teachers. The report also presents data on the roles teachers play, teachers' use of

instructional materials, the types of learning tasks employed by teachers, and teachers' assessment

of student learning.

Westerman, D.A. (1991). Expert and novice teacher decision making. Journal of Teacher Education,

42(4), 292-305.

Westerman provides indepth comparisons of the teaching practices exhibited by novice and expert

teachers in lesson planning and presentation.

Wise, A.E., Darling-Hammond, L., McLaughlin, M.W., and Bernstein, H.T. (1984). Teacher Evaluation:

A Study of Effective Practices. (Report No. R-3139-NIE). Santa Monica, CA: The Rand

Corporation.

The authors identify teacher evaluation systems as capable of defining the nature of teaching and

education in schools by either reinforcing the teaching as a profession, or further

deprofessionalizing the field.

Word, E., Achilles, C., Bain, H.P., Folger, J., Johnston, J., and Lintz, M.N. (1990). The state of

Tennessee's student/teacher ratio (STAR) project: Technical report. Nashville, TN: Tennessee

Department of Education.

This report presents results of Tennessee's 4-year longitudinal class size project, Student Teacher

Achievement Ratio (STAR). The study analyzes student achievement and development in three

class types: small classes with 13-17 students per teacher, regular classes with 22-25 students per

teacher, and regular classes with 22-25 students per teacher assisted by a full-time teacher’s aide.
A-1

Appendix A

Sample Methodology and Data Reliability
A-2
A-3

Table of Contents

Page

Sample Selection ................................................................................................................... A-5

Respondent and Response Rates............................................................................................ A-6

Sampling and Nonsampling Errors........................................................................................ A-6

Variances .............................................................................................................................. A-8

Definitions of Analysis Variables .......................................................................................... A-8

Comparisons to the 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey...................................................... A-10

Calculations of Major Field of Study for a Bachelor’s or Graduate Degree............................. A-11

Calculations of In-Field Teaching.......................................................................................... A-13

Background Information........................................................................................................ A-14

List of Appendix Tables

Table

A-1 Number and percent of responding full-time public school teachers in the study

sample and estimated number and percent of full-time public school teachers the

sample represents, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ..................... A-7

A-2 Percent of full-time public school teachers with any undergraduate or graduate major

in various fields of study, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998.......... A-12

A-3 Percent of full-time public school teachers with any undergraduate or graduate major

in various fields of study, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 .... A-12

List of Appendix Exhibits

Exhibit

A-1 Match of main teaching assignment field with major and minor fields of study:

FRSS 1998................................................................................................................. A-13

A-2 Match of main teaching assignment field with major and minor fields of study:

SASS 1993-94 ........................................................................................................... A-14
A-4
A-5

Sample Selection

The sample for the FRSS Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training consisted

of 4,049 full-time teachers in regular public

elementary, middle, and high schools in the 50

states and the District of Columbia. To select the

sample of teachers, a sample of 1,999 public

schools was first selected from the 1994-95

NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) Public

School Universe File. The sampling frame

constructed from the 1994-95 CCD file contained

79,250 regular public schools. Excluded from the

sampling frame were special education,

vocational, and alternative/other schools, schools

in the territories, overseas Department of Defense

schools, and schools with a high grade lower than

one or ungraded, or that taught only adult

education. The frame contained 49,955 regular

elementary schools, 14,510 regular middle

schools, and 15,785 regular high/combined

schools. A school was defined as an elementary

school if the lowest grade was less than or equal

to grade 3 and the highest grade was less than or

equal to grade 8. A middle school was defined as

having a lowest grade greater than or equal to

grade 4 and a highest grade less than or equal to

grade 9. A school was considered a high school

if its lowest grade was greater than or equal to

grade 9 and the highest grade was less than or

equal to grade 12. Combined schools were

defined as having a lowest grade less than or

equal to grade 3 and a highest grade greater than

or equal to grade 9. High schools and combined

schools were combined into one category for

sampling.

The public school sampling frame was stratified

by instructional level (elementary, middle, and

high school/combined), locale (city, urban fringe,

town, and rural), and school size (less than 300,

300 to 499, 500 to 999, 1,000 to 1,499, and 1,500

or more). Within the primary strata, schools were

also sorted by geographic region and percent

minority enrollment in the school to produce

additional implicit stratification. A sample of

1,999 schools was then selected from the sorted

frame with probabilities proportionate to size,

where the measure of size was the estimated

number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) teachers in

the school. The sample contained 665 elementary

schools, 553 middle schools, and 781

high/combined schools.

Each sampled school was asked to send a list of

their teachers, from which a teacher sampling

frame was prepared. The teacher sampling frame

was designed to represent full-time teachers who

taught in any of grades 1 through 12, and whose

main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social

sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or

science, or who taught a self-contained

classroom. To prepare the teacher lists, schools

were asked to start with a list of all the teachers in

the school, and then to cross off the following

types of teachers: part-time, itinerant, and

substitute teachers, teachers’ aides, unpaid

volunteers, principals (even those who teach),

kindergarten or preschool teachers, or anyone on

the list who was not a classroom teacher (e.g.,

librarians, secretaries, or custodians). Next,

schools were instructed to cross off the list any

teachers whose primary teaching assignments

were any of the following: art, bilingual

education/English as a second language, business,

computer science, health, home economics,

industrial arts, music, physical education,

remedial or resource, special education, or any

other teachers who did not primarily teach a core

academic subject or a self-contained class. Then,

schools were asked to code all teachers remaining

on the list to indicate the primary subject taught,

using the general categories of (1) math and

science teachers, (2) other academic teachers

(English/language arts, social studies/social

sciences, or foreign language), or (3) selfcontained, for teachers who teach all or most

academic subjects in a self-contained classroom

setting (including most elementary school

teachers). Schools were then asked to code the

total years of teaching experience for all teachers

remaining on the list, using the categories of 3 or

fewer years, or 4 or more years teaching

experience, counting the current academic year as

one full year.

Within selected schools, eligible teachers were

stratified by years of teaching experience (3 or

fewer, or 4 or more), and primary teaching

assignment (mathematics/science or other

academic/self-contained for middle and high

schools; all elementary school teachers were

treated for sampling as self-contained classroom

teachers, because too few teachers at this level

teach in departmentalized settings). Teacher

sampling rates were designed to select at least one

but no more than four teachers per school, with an
A-6

average of about two, and were designed to be

self-weighting (equal probability) samples within

strata. A total of 4,049 teachers were selected.

The sample contained 1,350 elementary school,

1,130 middle school, and 1,569 high

school/combined teachers.

Respondent and Response Rates

A letter and instruction sheet for preparing the list

of teachers was sent to the principal of each

sampled school in September 1997. The letter

introduced the study, requested the principal’s

cooperation to sample teachers, and asked the

principal to prepare a list of teachers that included

only full-time teachers of self-contained classes

or core academic subjects. Telephone followup

was conducted from October 1997 through March

1998 with principals who did not respond to the

initial request for teacher lists. Of the 1,999

schools in the sample, 14 were found to be out of

the scope of the survey (no longer in existence),

for a total of 1,985 eligible schools. Teacher lists

were provided by 1,818 schools, or 92 percent of

the eligible schools. The weighted response rate1

to the teacher list collection was 93 percent.

Questionnaires were mailed to the teachers in two

phases, so that data collection on the teacher

questionnaire would not be delayed while the list

collection phase was being completed. The first

phase of questionnaires was mailed in midFebruary 1998, and the second in mid-March

1998. Telephone followup was conducted from

March through June 1998 with teachers who did

not respond the initial questionnaire mailing. In

addition, a postcard prompt was sent to

nonresponding teachers in April 1998. Of the

4,049 teachers selected for the sample, 183 were

found to be out of the scope of the survey, usually

because they were not a regular full-time

classroom teacher, or because their main teaching

assignment was not in a core academic subject or

as a self-contained classroom teacher. This left a

total of 3,866 eligible teachers in the sample.

Completed questionnaires were received from

3,560 teachers, or 92 percent of the eligible

teachers. The weighted teacher response rate was

also 92 percent. The unweighted overall response

rate was 84 percent (91.6 percent for the list

 

1

 All weighted response rates were calculated using the base weight.

collection multiplied by 92.1 percent for the

teacher questionnaire). The weighted overall

response rate was 86 percent (93.1 percent for the

list collection multiplied by 92.1 percent for the

teacher questionnaire). Weighted item

nonresponse rates ranged from 0 percent to 1.9

percent. Because the item nonresponse was so

low, imputation for item nonresponse was not

implemented.

Sampling and

Nonsampling Errors

The responses were weighted to produce national

estimates (see table A-1). The weights were

designed to adjust for the variable probabilities of

selection and differential nonresponse. The

findings in this report are estimates based on the

sample selected and, consequently, are subject to

sampling variability.

The survey estimates are also subject to

nonsampling errors that can arise because of

nonobservation (nonresponse or noncoverage)

errors, errors of reporting, and errors made in data

collection. These errors can sometimes bias the

data. Nonsampling errors may include such

problems as misrecording of responses; incorrect

editing, coding, and data entry; differences related

to the particular time the survey was conducted;

or errors in data preparation. While general

sampling theory can be used in part to determine

how to estimate the sampling variability of a

statistic, nonsampling errors are not easy to

measure and, for measurement purposes, usually

require that an experiment be conducted as part of

the data collection procedures or that data

external to the study be used.

To minimize the potential for nonsampling errors,

the questionnaire was pretested with respondents

like those who completed the survey. During the

design of the survey and the survey pretest, an

effort was made to check for consistency of

interpretation of questions and to eliminate

ambiguous items. The questionnaire and

instructions were extensively reviewed by the

National Center for Education Statistics and the

Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of

Education. Manual and machine editing of the
A-7

Table A-1.—Number and percent of responding full-time public school teachers in the study

sample and estimated number and percent of full-time public school teachers the

sample represents, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

Respondent sample National estimate

School and teacher characteristic Number Percent Number Percent

All targeted public school teachers1............................................ 3,560 100 1,460,261 100

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................. 1,211 34 766,212 52

Middle school.................................................................................... 983 28 284,776 20

High school........................................................................................ 1,128 32 338,406 23

Combined .......................................................................................... 238 7 70,867 5

School enrollment size

Less than 300..................................................................................... 362 10 157,481 11

300 to 499.......................................................................................... 677 19 329,779 23

500 to 999.......................................................................................... 1,517 43 652,949 45

1,000 or more .................................................................................... 1,004 28 320,053 22

Locale

Central city ........................................................................................ 1,048 29 453,094 31

Urban fringe/large town.................................................................... 1,335 38 554,043 38

Rural/small town............................................................................... 1,177 33 453,124 31

Region

Northeast............................................................................................ 636 18 259,653 18

Midwest ............................................................................................. 877 25 357,746 24

South.................................................................................................. 1,386 39 563,111 39

West ................................................................................................... 661 19 279,751 19

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................. 926 26 376,307 26

6 to 20 percent................................................................................... 888 25 371,809 26

21 to 50 percent................................................................................. 856 24 349,323 24

More than 50 percent........................................................................ 875 25 356,971 25

Percent of public school students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ......................................................................... 957 27 368,984 25

15 to 32 percent................................................................................. 888 25 348,641 24

33 to 59 percent................................................................................. 872 25 367,132 25

60 percent or more ............................................................................ 833 24 372,331 26

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

.......................................................................... 1,210 34 733,651 50

Math/science...................................................................................... 1,041 29 307,840 21

Other targeted academic subject ...................................................... 1,309 37 418,771 29

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................. 845 24 202,204 14

4 to 9 years ........................................................................................ 808 23 324,219 22

10 to 19 years.................................................................................... 745 21 369,393 25

20 or more years................................................................................ 1,161 33 564,107 39

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ......................................................................... 3,069 87 1,259,063 87

Black, non-Hispanic.......................................................................... 243 7 103,552 7

Other .................................................................................................. 227 6 90,082 6

Sex

Male ................................................................................................... 1,093 31 367,638 25

Female................................................................................................ 2,467 69 1,092,623 75

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals because of rounding or missing data. There were very small amounts of missing data for the following

variables: percent minority enrollment in school (0.4 percent), percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (0.2 percent),

and teacher race/ethnicity (0.5 percent). Percents are computed within each classification variable, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
A-8

questionnaire responses were conducted to check

the data for accuracy and consistency. Cases with

missing or inconsistent items were recontacted by

telephone. Data were keyed with 100 percent

verification.

Variances

The standard error is a measure of the variability

of estimates due to sampling. It indicates the

variability of a sample estimate that would be

obtained from all possible samples of a given

design and size. Standard errors are used as a

measure of the precision expected from a

particular sample. If all possible samples were

surveyed under similar conditions, intervals of

1.96 standard errors below to 1.96 standard errors

above a particular statistic would include the true

population parameter being estimated in about 95

percent of the samples. This is a 95 percent

confidence interval. For example, the estimated

percentage of teachers who have a master’s

degree is 45.3 percent, and the estimated standard

error is 1.1 percent. The 95 percent confidence

interval for the statistic extends from [45.3 – (1.1

times 1.96)] to [45.3 + (1.1 times 1.96)], or from

43.1 to 47.5 percent. Tables of standard errors for

each table and figure in the report are provided in

the appendices.

Estimates of standard errors were computed using

a technique known as jackknife replication. As

with any replication method, jackknife replication

involves constructing a number of subsamples

(replicates) from the full sample and computing

the statistic of interest for each replicate. The

mean square error of the replicate estimates

around the full sample estimate provides an

estimate of the variances of the statistics. To

construct the replications, 50 stratified

subsamples of the full sample were created and

then dropped one at a time to define 50 jackknife

replicates. A computer program (WesVarPC)

was used to calculate the estimates of standard

errors. WesVarPC is a stand-alone Windows

application that computes sampling errors for a

wide variety of statistics (totals, percents, ratios,

log-odds ratios, general functions of estimates in

tables, linear regression parameters, and logistic

regression parameters).

The test statistics used in the analysis were

calculated using the jackknife variances and thus

appropriately reflected the complex nature of the

sample design. In particular, an adjusted chisquare test using Satterthwaite’s approximation to

the design effect was used in the analysis of the

two-way tables. Finally, Bonferroni adjustments

were made to control for multiple comparisons

where appropriate. For example, for an

“experiment-wise” comparison involving g

pairwise comparisons, each difference was tested

at the 0.05/g significance level to control for the

fact that g differences were simultaneously tested.

Definitions of

Analysis Variables

School instructional level – Schools were

classified according to their grade span in the

Common Core of Data (CCD).

Elementary school - lowest grade less

than or equal to grade 3 and highest

grade less than or equal to grade 8.

Middle school – lowest grade greater

than or equal to grade 4 and highest

grade less than or equal to grade 9.

High school – lowest grade greater than

or equal to grade 9 and highest grade

less than or equal to grade 12.

Combined school – lowest grade less

than or equal to grade 3 and highest

grade greater than or equal to grade 9.

School enrollment size – total number of student

enrolled as defined by the Common Core of Data

(CCD).

Less than 300 students

300 to 499 students

500 to 999 students

1,000 or more students

Locale – as defined in the Common Core of Data

(CCD).

Central city – a large or mid-size

central city of a Metropolitan Statistical

Area (MSA).
A-9

Urban fringe/large town – urban fringe

is a place within an MSA of a central

city, but not primarily its central city;

large town is an incorporated place not

within an MSA, with a population

greater than or equal to 25,000.

Small town/rural – small town is an

incorporated place not within an MSA,

with a population less than 25,000 and

greater than or equal to 2,500; rural is a

place with a population less than 2,500

and/or a population density of less than

1,000 per square mile, and defined as

rural by the U.S. Bureau of the Census.

Geographic region –

Northeast - Maine, New Hampshire,

Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island,

Connecticut, New York, New Jersey,

Pennsylvania

Midwest - Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,

Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa,

Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota,

Nebraska, Kansas

South - Delaware, Maryland, District of

Columbia, Virginia, West Virginia,

North Carolina, South Carolina,

Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Tennessee,

Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas,

Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas

West - Montana, Idaho, Wyoming,

Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah,

Nevada, Washington, Oregon,

California, Alaska, Hawaii

Percent minority enrollment in the school –

The percent of students enrolled in the school

whose race or ethnicity is classified as one of the

following: American Indian or Alaskan Native,

Asian or Pacific Islander, black, or Hispanic,

based on data in the 1995-96 CCD file. Data on

this variable were missing for 0.4 percent of the

teachers. The break points used for analysis were

based on empirically developed quartiles from the

weighted survey data.

5 percent or less

6 to 20 percent

21 to 50 percent

More than 50 percent

Percent of students at the school eligible for

free or reduced-price lunch – This was based on

information collected from the school during the

teacher list collection phase; if it was missing

from the list collection, it was obtained from the

CCD file, if possible. Data on this variable were

missing for 0.2 percent of the teachers. This item

served as the measurement of the concentration of

poverty at the school. The break points used for

analysis were based on empirically developed

quartiles from the weighted survey data.

Less than 15 percent

15 to 32 percent

33 to 59 percent

60 percent or more

Main teaching assignment – based on responses

to the survey questionnaire.

Self-contained classroom – The teacher

teaches all or most academic subjects to

the same group of students all or most of

the day (Q1=1).

Math/science – The teacher teaches

mathematics or science in a

departmentalized setting, teaching the

subject to several classes of different

students all or most of the day (Q1=2

and Q4A1=43 or 44).

Other targeted academic subject –

The teacher teaches English/language

arts, social studies/social science, or

foreign language in a departmentalized

setting, teaching the subject to several

classes of different students all or most

of the day (Q1=2 and Q4A1=41 or 42 or

45).

Teaching experience – total years of teaching

experience, based on responses to question 14 on

the survey questionnaire.

3 or fewer years

4 to 9 years

10 to 19 years

20 or more years

Teacher race/ethnicity – based on responses to

questions 12 (Hispanic or Latino origin) and 13

(race) on the survey questionnaire. Question 13

specified that teachers should circle one or more

racial categories to describe themselves. Data on
A-10

this variable were missing for 0.5 percent of the

teachers.

White, non-Hispanic – white only, and

not Hispanic.

Black, non-Hispanic – black or African

American only, and not Hispanic.

Other – Hispanic or Latino, American

Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native

Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, and

multi-racial (i.e., anyone who selected

more than one race to identify

themselves).

Sex – The sex of the teacher, based on question

11 on the survey questionnaire.

Male

Female

It is important to note that many of the school and

teacher characteristics used for independent

analyses may also be related to each other. For

example, enrollment size and instructional level

of schools are related, with middle and high

schools typically being larger than elementary

schools. Similarly, poverty concentration and

minority enrollment are related, with schools with

a high minority enrollment also more likely to

have a high concentration of poverty. Other

relationships between analysis variables may

exist. Because of the relatively small sample size

used in this study, it is difficult to separate the

independent effects of these variables. Their

existence, however, should be considered in the

interpretation of the data presented in this report.

Comparisons to the 1993-94

Schools and Staffing Survey

Data from the 1993-94 Schools and Staffing

Survey (SASS) teacher questionnaire were

reanalyzed for questionnaire items that are the

same or similar to items on the FRSS

questionnaire. The questionnaire items from the

SASS teacher survey are shown in appendix F,

and the detailed tables from the analyses are

shown in appendix C. As a first step in the

reanalysis process, a subset of teachers and

schools was selected from SASS that was

approximately the same as the teachers and

schools sampled for FRSS. Regular full-time

teachers who taught in grades 1 through 12 in

regular public schools (i.e., excluding special

education, vocational, and alternative/other

schools) in the 50 states and the District of

Columbia defined the overall eligible group of

teachers. Within that group, teachers were

selected for inclusion in the subset for these

analyses if their main teaching assignment was

either general elementary or a core academic

subject area (defined here as English/language

arts, social studies/social science, foreign

language, mathematics, or science), based on

question 21 in the SASS teacher questionnaire.

For comparability to the FRSS survey, a teacher

was considered to be a self-contained classroom

teacher if the main teaching assignment was

specified as general elementary (code 03).2 A

teacher was considered to be a math/science

teacher if the main assignment was specified as

mathematics (33), or one of the sciences (57

through 61 and 09). A teacher was considered to

be a teacher of one of the other targeted academic

subjects if the main teaching assignment was

specified as English/language arts (21),

journalism (16), reading (43), social studies/social

science (47), or one of the foreign languages (51

through 56).

Teachers were classified for instructional level of

the school based on the categorization used for

the FRSS survey (see above). In addition, the

category splits for the percent minority

enrollment in the school and the percent of

students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch

were based on the empirically developed quartiles

from the weighted FRSS survey data.

Information about the race of the teacher was

collected in a slightly different way on the SASS

questionnaire. Teachers were only allowed to

select one racial category to describe themselves,

and the categories were American Indian or

Alaska Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, black,

and white. The weighted distributions of the

SASS teachers by the various classification

variables are shown in table C-1. Teachers were

assigned as departmentalized or general

elementary for the average class size calculations

based on their main teaching assignment, with

math/science and other targeted academic

 

2

 For clarity, these teachers are referred to throughout the report as

general elementary teachers for both the 1998 FRSS and 1993-94

SASS studies.
A-11

teachers considered departmentalized.

Approximately 5 percent of the teachers were

excluded from the SASS class size analyses,

either because they taught “pull-out” classes,

where they provided instruction to students who

were released from their regular classes (2

percent), or because of reporting problems in their

class size information (3 percent).

When there are differences between the FRSS

and SASS data, there are a number of possible

reasons for such differences that should be

considered. One possible reason, of course, is

that the differences show actual change between

1993-94 and 1998. However, it is also important

to consider other possibilities. While the subset

of schools and teachers from SASS was selected

to be as comparable as possible to the FRSS

sample of schools and teachers, there may still be

some differences in the samples for the two

surveys. In addition, the questionnaires that the

teachers completed were very different. The

FRSS questionnaire was very short, consisting of

three pages of questions and one page of codes.

Information was collected in a very compact

format, and at a fairly aggregated level. For

example, teachers in departmentalized settings

were asked about their main and secondary

teaching assignments, rather than about all the

courses they taught, and were asked about their

teaching assignments and about major and minor

fields of study for degrees held at an aggregated

level (i.e., whether they taught courses or had

degrees in science, rather than in chemistry or

physics). The SASS questionnaire, on the other

hand, was 35 pages long and asked teachers for

very detailed information about courses taught

and degrees held, as well as a lot of other

information about the teacher and his or her job.

Thus, the questionnaires provided very different

response contexts for the teachers.

It is also important to be aware that some of the

questions asked on the two questionnaires appear

more similar at first glance than they actually are.

For example, the FRSS questionnaire asked

teachers whether they had participated in

professional development activities in the last 12

months that focused on “new methods of teaching

(e.g., cooperative learning).” The SASS

questionnaire asked teachers whether they had

participated in professional development

programs since the end of the last school year that

focused on “methods of teaching your subject

field,” and “cooperative learning in the

classroom” as two separate questions. Another

example is the item on parent support for

teachers. The FRSS survey asked whether

teachers agreed or disagreed with the statement,

“parents support me in my efforts to educate their

children.” The SASS questionnaire asked

whether teachers agreed or disagreed with the

statement, “I receive a great deal of support from

parents for the work I do.” In addition, the FRSS

survey had four statements about parent and

school support, compared with 25 statements

about school climate in the SASS survey, again

creating a very different response context for the

teachers. Thus, while differences between the

FRSS and SASS data may reflect actual change,

measurement issues must also be considered as

possible explanations.

Calculations of Major Field

of Study for a Bachelor’s

or Graduate Degree

A variable was constructed that combined

information about all the major fields of study for

the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctorate degrees

into the categories of academic field, subject area

education (i.e., the teaching of an academic field,

such as mathematics education), general

education, and other education fields (e.g., special

education, curriculum and instruction, or

educational administration). For the analyses

presented in the text (see tables 1 and 2), each

teacher was counted only once, even if he or she

had more than one major or more than one

degree. Major fields of study were selected in the

order of academic field, subject area education,

other education, and general education. For

example, if a teacher had a bachelor’s degree in

general education and a master’s degree in

English, he or she was considered for these

analyses to have majored in an academic field.

Similarly, if a teacher had a bachelor’s degree in

mathematics and a master’s degree in curriculum

and instruction, he or she was also considered for

these analyses to have majored in an academic

field. Tables A-2 and A-3 provide information

about duplicated degree counts. In these tables,

teachers with more than one major or more than

one degree are counted for each field of study in

which they have a major or degree. Thus, a
A-12

Table A-2.—Percent of full-time public school teachers with any undergraduate or graduate major

in various fields of study, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 38 24 62 15

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 22 11 85 14

Middle school..................................................................................... 44 31 52 16

High school ........................................................................................ 66 44 24 15

Combined........................................................................................... 55 48 28 14

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 50 16 53 5

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 41 21 59 10

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 32 26 66 19

20 or more years................................................................................. 36 28 63 18

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

NOTE: Percents are duplicated. That is, teachers with more than one major or more than one degree are counted for each field of study in which

they have a major or degree.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.

Table A-3.—Percent of full-time public school teachers with any undergraduate or graduate major

in various fields of study, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 39 29 61 15

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 24 16 84 15

Middle school..................................................................................... 44 36 51 15

High school ........................................................................................ 67 50 19 14

Combined........................................................................................... 55 47 31 12

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 46 22 52 5

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 38 25 60 11

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 35 30 64 17

20 or more years................................................................................. 40 33 61 17

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

NOTE: Percents are duplicated. That is, teachers with more than one major or more than one degree are counted for each field of study in which

they have a major.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
A-13

teacher with a bachelor’s degree in general

education and a master’s degree in English would

be counted once under academic field and once

under general education in table A-2 or A-3.

However, a teacher with a bachelor’s degree in

English and a master’s degree in history would be

counted only once in table A-2 or A-3, since both

degrees were in an academic field.

Calculations of

In-Field Teaching

A measure of in-field teaching was constructed

that compared the fields in which teachers had

undergraduate or graduate majors or minors with

the fields in which they had their main teaching

assignments (i.e., the field in which they reported

that they taught the most courses). A major or

minor was considered in field if it was in either

the academic field (e.g., mathematics) or subject

area education (e.g., mathematics education) that

matched the main teaching assignment. This

measure was constructed for any teacher who

taught English/language arts, foreign language,

social studies/social science, mathematics, or

science in a departmentalized setting in any of

grades 7 through 12. Teachers were defined as

teaching in field if they had an undergraduate or

graduate major or minor in the field of their main

teaching assignment. Details of how this measure

was constructed are provided below.

The in-field teaching analyses were based on

teacher level (grades taught) rather than on the

instructional level of the school. Any teacher

who provided departmentalized instruction and

who taught in grade 7 or above (for the first set of

analyses) or grade 9 or above (for the second set

of analyses) was included, regardless of whether

he or she also taught any lower grades. Teachers

of self-contained classrooms at all levels were

excluded, as were teachers who taught only in

grade 6 or below, even if they provided

departmentalized instruction. The in-field

teaching measure was constructed only for the

main teaching assignment, because there were too

few teachers in the FRSS sample with a

secondary teaching assignment to provide

meaningful estimates for in-field teaching in the

secondary assignment.

In-field teaching was defined as having a major or

minor at the bachelor’s, master’s, or doctorate

level in the field of the main teaching assignment.

The in-field teaching measure was constructed at

the aggregate level of English/language arts,

social studies/social science, foreign language,

math, and science. The measure was constructed

this way because the FRSS questionnaire

collected information about degrees and teaching

assignments at this aggregated level, rather than

at a lower level of aggregation (e.g., whether a

teacher had degrees or taught courses in

chemistry or physics) because of space limitations

on the FRSS questionnaire. The main teaching

assignment field was matched against the major

and minor fields of study for the FRSS data as

shown in exhibit A-1, using the categorization

approach from SASS. The numbers in

parentheses indicate the code numbers on the

FRSS questionnaire.

The main teaching assignment field was matched

against the major and minor fields of study for the

SASS data as shown in exhibit A-2. The numbers

in parentheses indicate the code numbers on the

SASS questionnaire.

Exhibit A-1.—Match of main teaching assignment field with major and minor fields of study:

FRSS 1998

Teaching assignment Major and minor fields of study

English/language arts (41) English/reading education (54), English (72)

Foreign languages (42) Foreign languages education (55), foreign languages (73)

Mathematics (43) Mathematics education (56), engineering (71),

 mathematics (74)

Science (44) Science education (57), science (75)

Social studies/social science (45) Social studies/social sciences education (58),

 social sciences (76)
A-14

Exhibit A-2.—Match of main teaching assignment field with major and minor fields of study:

SASS 1993-94

Teaching assignment Major and minor fields of study

English/language arts (21), English education (22), reading education (43),

 journalism (16), reading (43) English (21), communications and journalism (16)

Foreign languages (51-56) Foreign languages education (24),

 foreign languages (51-56)

Mathematics (33) Mathematics education (34), engineering (20),

 mathematics (33)

Science (57-61, 09) Science education (46), science (57-61)

Social studies/social science (47) Social studies/social sciences education (48),

 social sciences (62-66), psychology (41), public affairs

 and services (42), other area and ethnic studies (87)

Background Information

The survey was performed under contract with

Westat, using the Fast Response Survey System

(FRSS). Westat’s Project Director was Elizabeth

Farris, and the Survey Manager was Laurie

Lewis. Bernie Greene was the NCES Project

Officer. The data were requested by Terry

Dozier, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department

of Education.

This report was reviewed by the following

individuals:

Outside NCES

n Susan Choy, MPR Associates

n Richard Ingersoll, University of Georgia

n David Mandel, MPR Center for Curriculum

and Professional Development

n Judith Thompson, Connecticut State

Department of Education

Inside NCES

n Shelley Burns, Early Childhood,

International, and Crosscutting Studies

Division

n Mary Frase, Early Childhood, International,

and Crosscutting Studies Division

n Kerry Gruber, Elementary/Secondary and

Libraries Studies Division

n Marilyn McMillen, Chief Statistician

n Martin Orland, Associate Commissioner,

Early Childhood, International, and

Crosscutting Studies Division

n John Ralph, Early Childhood, International,

and Crosscutting Studies Division

For more information about the Fast Response

Survey System (FRSS), contact Bernie Greene,

Early Childhood, International, and Crosscutting

Studies Division, National Center for Education

Statistics, Office of Educational Research and

Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, 555

New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC

20208-5651, e-mail: Bernard_Greene@ed.gov,

telephone (202) 219-1366. For more information

about the Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, contact Edith

McArthur, Early Childhood, International, and

Crosscutting Studies Division, National Center

for Education Statistics, Office of Educational

Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of

Education, 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20208-5651, e-mail:

Edith_McArthur@ed.gov, telephone (202) 219-

1442.
B-1

Appendix B

Detailed Tables of Estimates

and

Tables of Standard Errors

for the

1998 FRSS Survey
B-2
B-3

Table of Contents

Detailed Tables of Estimates and Tables of Standard Errors

for the 1998 FRSS Survey

Table Page

B-1 Number and percent of full-time public school teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998................................................................................... 7

B-1a Standard errors of the number and percent of full-time public school teachers,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ............................................... 8

B-2 Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold bachelor’s, master’s,

doctorates, other degrees, and/or other certificates, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 9

B-2a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who hold

bachelor’s, master’s, doctorates, other degrees, and/or other certificates,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ............................................... 10

B-3 Average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher in the current school

for full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 11

B-3a Standard errors of the average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher

in the current school for full-time public school teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998................................................................................... 12

B-4 Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms with

various types of teaching certificates in their state, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 13

B-4a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms with various types of teaching certificates in their state,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ............................................... 14

B-5 Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with

various types of teaching certificates in their state in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 .................... 15

B-5a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in

departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state

in their main teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 16

B-6 Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with

various types of teaching certificates in their state in their secondary teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 .................... 17

B-6a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in

departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state

in their secondary teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 18

B-7 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 .................... 19

B-7a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 20
B-4

Table of Contents (continued)

Detailed Tables of Estimates and Tables of Standard Errors

for the 1998 FRSS Survey (continued)

Table Page

B-8 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 .................... 21

B-8a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 22

B-9 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that focused on

various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ........................ 23

B-9a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who

participated in professional development activities of various lengths in the last

12 months that focused on various topics, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 27

B-10 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998................................................................................... 31

B-10a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who

participated in professional development activities in the last 12 months

indicating the extent to which they believe the activity improved their classroom

teaching, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ................................ 35

B-11 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated with various

frequency in the last 12 months in various activities related to teaching, by

selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 .................................................... 39

B-11a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who

participated with various frequency in the last 12 months in various activities

related to teaching, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ................. 42

B-12 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities

related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998................................................................................... 45

B-12a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who

participated in various activities related to teaching in the last 12 months

indicating the extent to which they believe the activity improved their classroom

teaching, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ................................ 48

B-13 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program when they first began teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 51

B-13a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who

participated in a formal induction program when they first began teaching, by

selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 .................................................... 52
B-5

Table of Contents (continued)

Detailed Tables of Estimates and Tables of Standard Errors

for the 1998 FRSS Survey (continued)

Table Page

B-14 Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 53

B-14a Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in

general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998 ............................................................................ 54

B-15 Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998................................................................................... 55

B-15a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or

disagreeing with selected statements about parent and school support for

teachers, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998................................. 57

B-16 Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel

to do various activities in the classroom, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 59

B-16a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how

well prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998 ................................................................. 63
B-6
B-7

Table B-1.—Number and percent of full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic Number Percent

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 1,460,261 100

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 766,212 52

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 284,776 20

High school.......................................................................................................................... 338,406 23

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 70,867 5

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 157,481 11

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 329,779 23

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 652,949 45

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 320,053 22

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 453,094 31

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 554,043 38

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 453,124 31

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 259,653 18

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 357,746 24

South.................................................................................................................................... 563,111 39

West ..................................................................................................................................... 279,751 19

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 376,307 26

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 371,809 26

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 349,323 24

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 356,971 25

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 368,984 25

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 348,641 24

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 367,132 25

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 372,331 26

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 733,651 50

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 307,840 21

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 418,771 29

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 202,204 14

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 324,219 22

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 369,393 25

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 564,107 39

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 1,259,063 87

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 103,552 7

Other .................................................................................................................................... 90,082 6

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 367,638 25

Female.................................................................................................................................. 1,092,623 75

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals because of rounding. Percents are computed within each classification variable, but may not sum to 100

because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-8

Table B-1a.—Standard errors of the number and percent of full-time public school teachers, by

selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic Number Percent

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 14,464 *

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 12,938 0.5

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 5,164 0.4

High school.......................................................................................................................... 7,501 0.5

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 6,150 0.4

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 11,563 0.8

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 11,799 0.7

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 14,712 1.0

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 6,621 0.5

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 9,014 0.6

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 13,868 0.8

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 11,505 0.7

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 13,780 0.9

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 15,707 1.0

South.................................................................................................................................... 17,723 1.3

West ..................................................................................................................................... 19,201 1.3

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 15,614 1.0

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 16,000 1.1

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 13,527 0.9

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 14,233 0.9

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 16,508 1.1

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 20,308 1.3

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 17,868 1.3

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 14,312 0.9

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 14,149 0.6

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 7,695 0.5

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 8,295 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 7,235 0.5

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 13,765 0.9

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 12,308 0.8

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 15,615 1.0

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 15,090 0.8

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 8,973 0.6

Other .................................................................................................................................... 6,644 0.5

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 11,995 0.8

Female.................................................................................................................................. 17,909 0.8

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-9

Table B-2.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold bachelor’s, master’s, doctorates,

other degrees, and/or other certificates, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1998

School and teacher characteristic Bachelor’s

degree

Master’s

degree

Doctorate

degree

Other

degree

Other

certificate

All targeted public school teachers1...... 100** 45 1 1 5

School instructional level

Elementary school....................................... 100 40 1 1 4

Middle school.............................................. 100** 46 1 2 5

High school.................................................. 100 55 2 1 5

Combined .................................................... 100 49 3 * 7

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... 100 37 0 1 6

300 to 499.................................................... 100 47 1 1 5

500 to 999.................................................... 100 42 1 1 4

1,000 or more .............................................. 100** 54 2 1 5

Locale

Central city .................................................. 100** 46 2 1 6

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 100 49 1 1 4

Rural/small town......................................... 100 40 * 1 5

Region

Northeast...................................................... 100** 60 2 1 6

Midwest ....................................................... 100 51 * 1 4

South............................................................ 100** 39 1 2 4

West ............................................................. 100 38 1 1 5

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 100 49 * 2 5

6 to 20 percent............................................. 100 51 1 1 3

21 to 50 percent........................................... 100 43 1 1 4

More than 50 percent.................................. 100** 38 1 1 7

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 100 57 2 1 4

15 to 32 percent........................................... 100 46 1 1 5

33 to 59 percent........................................... 100** 41 1 2 4

60 percent or more ...................................... 100 37 1 1 6

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................................... 100 41 1 1 4

Math/science................................................ 100** 49 2 1 4

Other targeted academic subject ................ 100** 50 1 1 6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 100** 16 1 2 4

4 to 9 years .................................................. 100 31 * 1 3

10 to 19 years.............................................. 100 48 1 1 5

20 or more years.......................................... 100 62 2 1 6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 100** 46 1 1 5

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... 100 41 2 1 2

Other ............................................................ 100** 34 1 2 6

Sex

Male ............................................................. 100** 51 2 1 4

Female.......................................................... 100** 43 1 1 5

*Less than 0.5 percent.

**Rounds to 100 percent for presentation in the tables.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Zeros indicate that no teacher in the sample gave the indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-10

Table B-2a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who hold

bachelor’s, master’s, doctorates, other degrees, and/or other certificates, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic Bachelor’s

degree

Master’s

degree

Doctorate

degree

Other

degree

Other

certificate

All targeted public school teachers1...... 0.02 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school....................................... * 1.8 0.2 0.3 0.6

Middle school.............................................. 0.1 1.9 0.2 0.5 0.7

High school.................................................. * 1.5 0.5 0.3 0.7

Combined .................................................... * 3.7 1.6 0.2 1.8

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... * 2.6 * 0.5 1.8

300 to 499.................................................... * 2.1 0.5 0.3 1.0

500 to 999.................................................... * 1.9 0.3 0.3 0.6

1,000 or more .............................................. 0.1 1.7 0.4 0.3 0.7

Locale

Central city .................................................. 0.1 2.1 0.4 0.3 0.8

Urban fringe/large town.............................. * 1.6 0.3 0.3 0.5

Rural/small town......................................... * 1.5 0.2 0.4 0.7

Region

Northeast...................................................... 0.1 2.8 0.8 0.3 1.2

Midwest ....................................................... * 2.0 0.2 0.4 0.7

South............................................................ 0.03 1.6 0.3 0.3 0.7

West ............................................................. * 2.0 0.3 0.3 0.9

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... * 1.9 0.2 0.6 0.8

6 to 20 percent............................................. * 2.1 0.5 0.3 0.7

21 to 50 percent........................................... * 2.1 0.4 0.4 0.7

More than 50 percent.................................. 0.1 2.2 0.3 0.4 0.9

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... * 1.8 0.6 0.3 0.7

15 to 32 percent........................................... * 2.0 0.3 0.3 0.8

33 to 59 percent........................................... 0.1 2.4 0.3 0.4 0.6

60 percent or more ...................................... * 2.3 0.2 0.4 1.1

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................................... * 1.8 0.3 0.3 0.6

Math/science................................................ 0.05 1.8 0.4 0.4 0.8

Other targeted academic subject ................ 0.05 1.5 0.3 0.3 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 0.1 1.6 0.3 0.5 0.8

4 to 9 years .................................................. * 2.3 0.1 0.4 0.6

10 to 19 years.............................................. * 1.8 0.3 0.3 0.9

20 or more years.......................................... * 1.5 0.4 0.3 0.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 0.02 1.1 0.2 0.2 0.4

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... * 4.2 0.8 0.4 1.1

Other ............................................................ 0.2 4.1 0.9 1.0 1.8

Sex

Male ............................................................. 0.1 1.8 0.6 0.3 0.6

Female.......................................................... 0.01 1.4 0.2 0.2 0.4

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-11

Table B-3.—Average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher in the current school for

full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic Total years as a teacher Years as a teacher in the

current school

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 15 10

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 15 10

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 15 9

High school.......................................................................................................................... 17 11

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 16 11

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 16 11

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 16 10

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 15 10

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 16 10

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 15 8

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 16 10

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 16 11

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 18 12

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 17 12

South.................................................................................................................................... 14 9

West ..................................................................................................................................... 14 8

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 17 13

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 16 10

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 15 9

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 13 8

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 16 11

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 17 11

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 16 10

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 13 8

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 15 10

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 15 10

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 16 11

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 2 2

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 6 4

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 14 9

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 26 17

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 16 10

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 15 9

Other .................................................................................................................................... 13 8

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 16 11

Female.................................................................................................................................. 15 10

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-12

Table B-3a.—Standard errors of the average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher in

the current school for full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic Total years as a teacher Years as a teacher in the

current school

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 0.2 0.2

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.3

High school.......................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 0.8 0.8

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 0.6 0.6

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 0.3 0.3

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 0.3 0.3

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 0.3 0.3

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 0.4 0.4

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

South.................................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

West ..................................................................................................................................... 0.5 0.4

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.4

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.3

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.3

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 0.5 0.3

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.4

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.4

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 0.4 0.3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 0.3 0.3

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 0.3 0.3

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 0.3 0.2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 0.03 0.03

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.2

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 0.1 0.3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 0.7 0.6

Other .................................................................................................................................... 0.7 0.6

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Female.................................................................................................................................. 0.2 0.2

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-13

Table B-4.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms with

various types of teaching certificates in their state, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

School and teacher

characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school

teachers1

........................... 93 3 2 1 1 0

School instructional level2

Elementary school..................... 93 3 2 1 1 0

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................. 96 1 1 1 * 0

300 to 499.................................. 94 3 1 1 * 0

500 to 999.................................. 92 4 2 2 1 0

1,000 or more ............................ 85 3 7 4 2 0

Locale

Central city ................................ 91 3 2 2 1 0

Urban fringe/large town............ 92 4 2 2 * 0

Rural/small town....................... 96 2 1 * * 0

Region

Northeast.................................... 91 5 1 3 0 0

Midwest ..................................... 96 3 * 1 0 0

South.......................................... 94 3 2 1 * 0

West ........................................... 90 3 3 2 2 0

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 96 2 1 2 0 0

6 to 20 percent........................... 95 3 1 1 * 0

21 to 50 percent......................... 93 3 2 1 * 0

More than 50 percent................ 88 5 3 2 2 0

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 94 3 1 2 * 0

15 to 32 percent......................... 95 3 1 1 0 0

33 to 59 percent......................... 95 2 1 1 1 0

60 percent or more .................... 90 4 3 2 1 0

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 65 11 11 8 4 0

4 to 9 years ................................ 92 5 1 2 * 0

10 to 19 years............................ 99 1 * * 0 0

20 or more years........................ 99 1 0 0 0 0

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................. 94 3 2 1 * 0

Black, non-Hispanic.................. 88 7 1 4 1 0

Other .......................................... 88 5 3 1 4 0

Sex

Male ........................................... 91 3 2 3 1 0

Female........................................ 93 3 2 1 1 0

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in

analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in general elementary classrooms include all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998

FRSS study, regardless of instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Zeros indicate that no teacher in the sample gave the

indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-14

Table B-4a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms with various types of teaching certificates in their state, by

selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher

characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 *

School instructional level2

Elementary school..................... 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 *

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................. 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.2 *

300 to 499.................................. 1.1 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.2 *

500 to 999.................................. 1.0 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 *

1,000 or more ............................ 2.9 1.5 2.3 1.9 1.3 *

Locale

Central city ................................ 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.6 *

Urban fringe/large town............ 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.2 *

Rural/small town....................... 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 *

Region

Northeast.................................... 1.8 1.7 0.6 0.8 * *

Midwest ..................................... 1.1 1.1 0.3 0.4 * *

South.......................................... 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 *

West ........................................... 1.4 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 *

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.5 * *

6 to 20 percent........................... 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.1 *

21 to 50 percent......................... 1.6 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.4 *

More than 50 percent................ 1.7 1.1 0.7 0.7 0.8 *

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.3 *

15 to 32 percent......................... 1.5 1.1 0.5 0.6 * *

33 to 59 percent......................... 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 *

60 percent or more .................... 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.7 *

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 3.1 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.5 *

4 to 9 years ................................ 1.6 1.4 0.4 0.7 0.3 *

10 to 19 years............................ 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 * *

20 or more years........................ 0.5 0.5 * * * *

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................. 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 *

Black, non-Hispanic.................. 3.5 2.7 0.6 1.7 0.8 *

Other .......................................... 3.2 2.0 1.3 0.6 1.6 *

Sex

Male ........................................... 2.0 1.1 0.9 1.1 0.8 *

Female........................................ 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 *

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in

analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in general elementary classrooms include all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998

FRSS study, regardless of instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-15

Table B-5.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with various types

of teaching certificates in their state in their main teaching assignment field, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school

teachers1..................................... 92 4 2 1 1 *

School instructional level2

Middle school ..................................... 93 3 2 1 1 *

High school......................................... 91 4 3 1 1 *

Combined............................................ 87 4 5 3 * 1

School enrollment size

Less than 300...................................... 95 2 2 0 1 *

300 to 499 ........................................... 89 5 4 1 1 1

500 to 999 ........................................... 93 4 2 1 1 *

1,000 or more...................................... 91 3 3 2 1 0

Locale

Central city.......................................... 90 3 3 2 1 *

Urban fringe/large town..................... 92 3 2 1 1 *

Rural/small town ................................ 92 5 2 1 1 *

Region

Northeast............................................. 90 5 4 1 0 *

Midwest............................................... 93 4 2 1 0 *

South ................................................... 92 3 2 1 1 *

West..................................................... 90 1 3 2 3 0

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less.................................. 92 3 3 1 * *

6 to 20 percent .................................... 94 3 2 1 * *

21 to 50 percent .................................. 93 3 2 1 1 *

More than 50 percent ......................... 87 5 3 2 3 *

Percent of students in school eligible

for free or reduced-price school

lunch

Less than 15 percent........................... 92 3 3 1 * 1

15 to 32 percent .................................. 93 3 2 2 1 *

33 to 59 percent .................................. 94 3 2 1 * 0

60 percent or more.............................. 87 5 3 2 3 1

Main teaching assignment

Math/science....................................... 91 4 3 1 1 *

Other targeted academic subject........ 92 4 2 1 1 *

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................. 64 13 12 5 6 *

4 to 9 years.......................................... 89 5 3 1 * *

10 to 19 years...................................... 97 1 * * * 1

20 or more years................................. 99 1 * 0 0 0

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic .......................... 93 3 3 1 * *

Black, non-Hispanic........................... 82 7 3 3 4 1

Other.................................................... 85 5 2 2 5 1

Sex

Male..................................................... 90 4 3 1 1 1

Female................................................. 92 4 2 1 1 *

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other

school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Zeros indicate that no teacher in the sample gave the

indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
B-16

Table B-5a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized

settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher

characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1

School instructional level2

Middle school............................ 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2

High school................................ 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1

Combined .................................. 2.9 1.3 2.0 0.8 0.2 0.5

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................. 1.7 1.1 0.8 * 0.5 0.3

300 to 499.................................. 2.2 1.4 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

500 to 999.................................. 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.2

1,000 or more ............................ 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 *

Locale

Central city ................................ 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3

Urban fringe/large town............ 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.2

Rural/small town....................... 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1

Region

Northeast.................................... 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.5 * 0.3

Midwest ..................................... 1.5 0.8 0.8 0.3 * 0.3

South.......................................... 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2

West ........................................... 1.4 0.4 0.8 0.7 1.1 *

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 1.4 0.7 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.3

6 to 20 percent........................... 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1

21 to 50 percent......................... 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2

More than 50 percent................ 1.2 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.3

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.3

15 to 32 percent......................... 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.1

33 to 59 percent......................... 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.2 *

60 percent or more .................... 1.5 0.9 0.7 0.6 1.1 0.4

Main teaching assignment

Math/science.............................. 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 2.3 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.4 0.3

4 to 9 years ................................ 1.5 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.3

10 to 19 years............................ 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3

20 or more years........................ 0.4 0.4 0.1 * * *

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................. 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1

Black, non-Hispanic.................. 3.0 1.7 1.4 1.1 1.5 1.0

Other .......................................... 3.0 1.5 0.9 1.3 2.7 0.8

Sex

Male ........................................... 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3

Female........................................ 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by

other school and teacher characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-17

Table B-6.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with various types

of teaching certificates in their state in their secondary teaching assignment field, by

selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school teachers1.... 85 3 1 2 1 8

School instructional level2

Middle school............................................ 86 2 0 1 1 9

High school................................................ 82 3 2 3 * 9

Combined................................................... 78 8 * 0 0 13

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................. 88 3 0 0 0 9

300 to 499.................................................. 81 5 3 2 * 9

500 to 999.................................................. 87 3 1 1 2 7

1,000 or more ............................................ 81 2 1 3 3 10

Locale

Central city ................................................ 81 4 1 3 1 10

Urban fringe/large town............................ 85 2 2 2 2 7

Rural/small town ....................................... 88 3 1 * 1 7

Region

Northeast.................................................... 84 4 2 1 0 10

Midwest ..................................................... 87 6 1 0 0 6

South .......................................................... 88 2 1 2 1 7

West ........................................................... 77 2 2 3 6 12

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less......................................... 84 4 2 * 0 9

6 to 20 percent........................................... 93 2 1 1 0 3

21 to 50 percent......................................... 87 1 * 2 * 9

More than 50 percent ................................ 75 4 1 3 6 11

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent.................................. 81 4 3 1 0 10

15 to 32 percent......................................... 88 3 1 1 0 7

33 to 59 percent......................................... 87 2 0 2 * 9

60 percent or more .................................... 82 2 1 2 6 7

Main teaching assignment

Math/science.............................................. 86 3 1 1 1 8

Other targeted academic subject .............. 84 3 2 2 2 8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................................... 68 6 7 4 6 9

4 to 9 years................................................. 74 7 0 4 1 14

10 to 19 years ............................................ 92 0 1 * 1 6

20 or more years........................................ 94 1 0 0 0 5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................. 86 3 1 2 * 8

Black, non-Hispanic.................................. # # # # # #

Other .......................................................... 76 4 0 1 7 11

Sex

Male ........................................................... 81 3 2 2 1 11

Female........................................................ 87 3 1 1 2 7

*Less than 0.5 percent.

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in English/language

arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other

school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Zeros indicate that no teacher in the sample gave the

indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
B-18

Table B-6a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized

settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state in their secondary

teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher

characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 1.8 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.5

School instructional level2

Middle school............................ 2.2 0.7 * 0.6 0.7 2.0

High school................................ 3.0 1.5 1.1 1.5 0.3 2.7

Combined .................................. 8.9 5.3 0.4 * * 4.9

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................. 3.8 2.0 * * * 3.0

300 to 499.................................. 4.5 2.4 2.4 1.4 0.4 2.8

500 to 999.................................. 2.5 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.2 2.1

1,000 or more ............................ 4.8 1.0 0.7 1.6 1.6 3.7

Locale

Central city ................................ 3.4 1.5 0.7 1.6 0.8 2.9

Urban fringe/large town............ 3.1 0.9 1.4 1.0 1.7 2.3

Rural/small town....................... 2.6 1.3 0.5 0.2 0.6 2.1

Region

Northeast.................................... 4.5 2.1 1.6 0.7 * 4.1

Midwest ..................................... 4.1 2.0 0.6 * * 2.9

South.......................................... 2.6 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.6 1.8

West ........................................... 4.1 1.0 1.1 1.5 3.2 3.2

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 3.8 1.6 1.6 0.3 * 2.9

6 to 20 percent........................... 1.8 1.1 0.8 0.8 * 1.4

21 to 50 percent......................... 3.0 0.6 0.5 1.4 0.3 2.8

More than 50 percent................ 5.6 1.9 0.9 1.8 3.1 3.6

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 4.8 2.0 2.0 0.9 * 3.3

15 to 32 percent......................... 3.1 1.4 0.7 0.9 * 2.8

33 to 59 percent......................... 2.6 1.3 * 1.2 0.3 2.3

60 percent or more .................... 4.6 1.3 0.8 1.3 3.0 2.3

Main teaching assignment

Math/science.............................. 2.6 1.2 0.5 0.7 0.7 1.7

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 2.3 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.9

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 4.8 2.5 3.4 2.2 4.0 2.5

4 to 9 years ................................ 4.2 2.4 * 1.6 1.0 3.2

10 to 19 years............................ 2.4 * 0.7 0.4 0.8 2.1

20 or more years........................ 2.2 0.7 * * * 2.1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................. 1.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.2 1.6

Black, non-Hispanic.................. # # # # # #

Other .......................................... 7.3 2.6 * 1.4 6.6 4.5

Sex

Male ........................................... 3.0 1.1 1.5 1.1 0.8 2.9

Female........................................ 2.0 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.9 1.5

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by

other school and teacher characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-19

Table B-7.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment

field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1...... 86 96 89 82 88

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... 85 # # 82 88

300 to 499.................................................... 79 # 91 87 86

500 to 999.................................................... 83 94 87 78 87

1,000 or more .............................................. 92 99 91 85 91

Locale

Central city .................................................. 82 99 85 81 79

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 91 97 90 83 94

Rural/small town......................................... 85 94 91 82 89

Region

Northeast...................................................... 85 99 87 87 89

Midwest ....................................................... 89 97 82 86 93

South............................................................ 87 90 92 80 88

West ............................................................. 84 # 92 78 80

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 87 94 88 85 93

6 to 20 percent............................................. 89 95 88 81 89

21 to 50 percent........................................... 86 100 93 87 88

More than 50 percent.................................. 83 # 86 76 81

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 90 96 91 87 93

15 to 32 percent........................................... 89 99 87 89 92

33 to 59 percent........................................... 86 # 89 81 81

60 percent or more ...................................... 76 # 86 69 83

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 85 # 89 79 82

4 to 9 years .................................................. 79 95 87 86 83

10 to 19 years.............................................. 85 96 86 77 88

20 or more years.......................................... 90 100 91 85 96

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 87 96 88 81 88

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... 70 # 96 90 #

Other ............................................................ # # # 87 93

Sex

Male ............................................................. 91 95 93 87 92

Female.......................................................... 85 97 81 79 84

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-20

Table B-7a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1...... 1.4 1.3 1.6 2.1 1.8

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... 5.2 # # 8.2 6.8

300 to 499.................................................... 5.0 # 4.6 5.7 6.0

500 to 999.................................................... 2.8 3.4 3.2 3.6 3.1

1,000 or more .............................................. 1.5 0.8 1.8 3.0 2.4

Locale

Central city .................................................. 3.4 1.4 3.7 4.4 3.8

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 1.8 2.2 2.5 3.3 1.8

Rural/small town......................................... 2.5 2.9 2.8 4.4 2.5

Region

Northeast...................................................... 3.6 1.3 4.2 4.8 3.9

Midwest ....................................................... 3.3 2.0 4.3 3.7 2.2

South............................................................ 1.9 5.2 2.4 3.4 2.7

West ............................................................. 4.3 # 3.7 4.9 5.9

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 3.0 3.2 3.8 4.4 2.2

6 to 20 percent............................................. 2.6 2.8 3.6 3.7 3.1

21 to 50 percent........................................... 2.6 * 2.7 3.9 3.4

More than 50 percent.................................. 3.7 # 3.6 5.6 4.7

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 2.0 2.3 2.6 3.4 2.1

15 to 32 percent........................................... 2.7 1.1 3.6 3.1 2.8

33 to 59 percent........................................... 3.1 # 3.2 4.1 4.9

60 percent or more ...................................... 5.0 # 4.4 6.4 6.0

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 3.6 # 3.6 3.9 3.3

4 to 9 years .................................................. 4.3 3.7 3.4 4.0 4.8

10 to 19 years.............................................. 3.3 2.7 4.3 5.3 3.4

20 or more years.......................................... 1.9 * 2.6 3.5 2.0

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 1.3 1.4 1.7 2.3 2.0

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... 10.2 # 3.3 5.3 #

Other ............................................................ # # # 7.2 5.2

Sex

Male ............................................................. 2.6 3.9 1.7 2.6 1.6

Female.......................................................... 1.7 1.3 3.6 3.2 3.3

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

*Standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-21

Table B-8.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment field,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1...... 96 96 96 90 94

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... # # # # #

300 to 499.................................................... 97 # # 91 #

500 to 999.................................................... 97 # 95 94 96

1,000 or more .............................................. 95 99 96 88 94

Locale

Central city .................................................. 94 100 96 88 90

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 97 96 95 90 98

Rural/small town......................................... 97 93 97 90 93

Region

Northeast...................................................... 98 98 92 89 90

Midwest ....................................................... 94 97 94 93 97

South............................................................ 97 # 97 90 94

West ............................................................. 96 # 100 84 94

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 96 93 95 90 95

6 to 20 percent............................................. 99 95 93 91 94

21 to 50 percent........................................... 95 # 98 94 95

More than 50 percent.................................. 94 # 97 82 92

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 97 96 97 90 94

15 to 32 percent........................................... 96 99 94 92 96

33 to 59 percent........................................... 96 # 97 91 90

60 percent or more ...................................... 93 # # 81 #

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 92 # 93 88 91

4 to 9 years .................................................. 97 # 98 85 94

10 to 19 years.............................................. 97 96 98 79 91

20 or more years.......................................... 96 100 95 98 98

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 97 96 95 89 94

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... # # # # #

Other ............................................................ # # # # #

Sex

Male ............................................................. 95 # 96 89 95

Female.......................................................... 96 96 96 90 93

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-22

Table B-8a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1...... 1.0 1.5 1.2 2.0 1.4

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... # # # # #

300 to 499.................................................... 3.3 # # 5.7 #

500 to 999.................................................... 1.5 # 2.9 3.7 2.1

1,000 or more .............................................. 1.4 0.8 1.6 3.1 1.9

Locale

Central city .................................................. 2.3 * 2.2 4.6 4.5

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 1.6 2.9 2.3 3.5 1.3

Rural/small town......................................... 1.6 3.3 1.9 2.6 2.3

Region

Northeast...................................................... 1.9 1.7 3.9 5.2 4.4

Midwest ....................................................... 2.6 2.2 3.3 2.8 1.9

South............................................................ 1.5 # 1.6 2.8 2.1

West ............................................................. 2.3 # * 4.9 4.0

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 1.9 3.8 2.7 4.0 2.4

6 to 20 percent............................................. 1.4 3.3 3.2 2.8 3.0

21 to 50 percent........................................... 2.7 # 1.9 2.6 2.5

More than 50 percent.................................. 2.6 # 2.3 6.3 3.7

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 1.5 2.7 1.8 3.9 2.4

15 to 32 percent........................................... 1.8 1.3 2.7 2.5 3.0

33 to 59 percent........................................... 2.3 # 2.1 3.5 4.2

60 percent or more ...................................... 3.9 # # 8.8 #

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 3.2 # 3.9 4.5 3.2

4 to 9 years .................................................. 2.4 # 2.4 5.4 4.6

10 to 19 years.............................................. 2.0 3.2 2.5 5.3 3.6

20 or more years.......................................... 1.5 * 2.0 1.3 1.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 1.1 1.7 1.4 2.1 1.5

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... # # # # #

Other ............................................................ # # # # #

Sex

Male ............................................................. 2.1 # 1.4 2.7 1.5

Female.......................................................... 1.2 1.6 2.5 2.6 2.6

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

*Standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-23

Table B-9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that focused on various

topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

In-depth study in the subject area of

your main teaching assignment

New methods of teaching

(e.g., cooperative learning)

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 27 32 24 17 23 47 21 8

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 25 32 26 17 22 48 20 9

Middle school................................... 27 33 23 16 23 45 24 8

High school....................................... 33 31 19 17 24 47 22 6

Combined ......................................... 29 30 23 19 22 47 20 11

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 28 34 22 16 25 46 19 11

300 to 499......................................... 28 33 22 17 25 48 20 8

500 to 999......................................... 26 32 26 17 23 47 22 9

1,000 or more ................................... 30 30 21 18 21 49 23 8

Locale

Central city ....................................... 24 32 26 18 22 48 22 9

Urban fringe/large town................... 28 31 23 18 23 47 22 9

Rural/small town.............................. 30 34 21 15 25 47 20 8

Region

Northeast........................................... 29 31 23 18 23 46 22 9

Midwest ............................................ 31 35 19 14 25 47 20 8

South................................................. 26 32 25 16 22 50 21 7

West .................................................. 24 28 26 22 22 44 23 11

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 31 36 20 14 25 48 20 7

6 to 20 percent.................................. 24 34 25 17 25 49 20 7

21 to 50 percent................................ 29 29 25 16 23 45 22 10

More than 50 percent....................... 25 29 25 21 19 48 23 11

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 28 33 21 18 23 49 21 7

15 to 32 percent................................ 30 30 23 16 25 45 22 7

33 to 59 percent................................ 27 34 25 14 22 49 20 9

60 percent or more ........................... 25 30 25 20 22 46 22 10

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 25 32 26 17 22 48 20 10

Math/science..................................... 28 31 22 19 27 46 20 7

Other targeted academic subject ..... 31 33 20 15 22 47 24 7

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 23 33 27 16 18 47 26 9

4 to 9 years ....................................... 22 32 28 18 21 48 23 8

10 to 19 years................................... 26 32 25 17 22 49 20 10

20 or more years............................... 33 32 19 16 27 46 19 8

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 28 32 23 16 24 47 21 8

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 19 33 28 21 17 44 26 12

Other ................................................. 24 29 24 24 15 49 22 14

Sex

Male .................................................. 30 32 21 17 24 46 23 7

Female............................................... 27 32 24 17 23 48 21 9
B-24

Table B-9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that focused on various

topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

State or district curriculum and

performance standards

Integration of educational technology

in the grade or subject you teach

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 19 50 25 7 22 49 22 7

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 17 50 25 7 21 49 23 7

Middle school................................... 19 48 27 6 20 50 23 7

High school....................................... 21 50 22 7 25 48 19 8

Combined ......................................... 18 53 17 11 22 47 24 6

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 18 48 29 5 23 50 21 6

300 to 499......................................... 16 52 26 7 18 51 24 7

500 to 999......................................... 18 50 25 8 22 47 23 7

1,000 or more ................................... 23 49 21 7 24 49 20 8

Locale

Central city ....................................... 20 51 22 7 22 51 19 8

Urban fringe/large town................... 18 51 25 7 22 47 24 7

Rural/small town.............................. 18 48 27 7 22 49 22 7

Region

Northeast........................................... 17 50 26 7 23 48 22 7

Midwest ............................................ 20 50 23 7 20 49 23 8

South................................................. 19 53 22 6 21 51 22 6

West .................................................. 18 44 29 9 25 45 23 8

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 18 50 25 7 22 46 25 7

6 to 20 percent.................................. 15 49 28 8 21 51 22 6

21 to 50 percent................................ 21 49 23 7 22 47 23 8

More than 50 percent....................... 21 52 21 6 23 52 18 7

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 18 50 24 8 19 47 27 7

15 to 32 percent................................ 17 51 26 6 23 48 23 6

33 to 59 percent................................ 20 48 25 7 22 51 19 8

60 percent or more ........................... 19 51 23 6 23 49 20 7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 17 50 26 7 20 50 23 7

Math/science..................................... 20 53 21 7 23 49 19 9

Other targeted academic subject ..... 21 49 24 7 24 47 23 6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 22 55 19 4 28 49 18 5

4 to 9 years ....................................... 16 51 25 8 21 46 23 10

10 to 19 years................................... 16 48 28 8 21 48 23 7

20 or more years............................... 20 49 24 7 21 51 22 6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 19 50 25 7 22 48 23 7

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 20 51 21 8 16 56 20 8

Other ................................................. 16 50 24 10 22 52 18 8

Sex

Male .................................................. 23 47 24 5 23 48 21 8

Female............................................... 17 51 25 7 22 49 22 7
B-25

Table B-9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that focused on various

topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Student performance assessment Classroom management,

including student discipline

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 33 47 15 5 51 38 8 3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 28 49 17 6 46 43 8 3

Middle school................................... 35 48 13 3 53 36 8 3

High school....................................... 39 45 11 4 60 31 6 2

Combined ......................................... 39 40 16 5 55 34 9 3

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 34 47 13 6 52 40 8 1

300 to 499......................................... 31 48 16 4 48 41 8 3

500 to 999......................................... 32 47 15 6 50 39 8 3

1,000 or more ................................... 35 46 13 5 56 34 7 3

Locale

Central city ....................................... 31 48 16 5 47 40 9 3

Urban fringe/large town................... 31 49 15 5 53 37 7 3

Rural/small town.............................. 36 45 13 5 53 38 7 2

Region

Northeast........................................... 35 46 15 5 54 36 6 4

Midwest ............................................ 37 48 12 4 56 36 7 1

South................................................. 32 49 15 4 46 42 9 3

West .................................................. 28 45 19 8 54 36 7 3

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 37 47 11 5 58 35 5 2

6 to 20 percent.................................. 31 50 15 4 57 34 6 3

21 to 50 percent................................ 35 44 15 6 48 42 8 2

More than 50 percent....................... 28 49 18 6 41 43 12 4

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 34 47 14 4 60 31 6 3

15 to 32 percent................................ 36 46 13 4 56 36 7 1

33 to 59 percent................................ 32 48 14 6 51 38 8 3

60 percent or more ........................... 29 48 18 6 39 47 10 4

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 28 49 17 6 47 43 8 3

Math/science..................................... 41 44 12 3 60 31 6 2

Other targeted academic subject ..... 35 46 14 5 53 35 8 4

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 34 48 15 3 35 46 14 4

4 to 9 years ....................................... 28 48 18 6 47 42 7 4

10 to 19 years................................... 31 48 16 4 54 36 7 2

20 or more years............................... 36 46 12 5 57 35 6 2

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 34 48 14 4 54 37 7 3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 24 47 20 9 33 48 13 6

Other ................................................. 27 42 23 8 37 46 12 5

Sex

Male .................................................. 39 45 12 4 55 36 6 3

Female............................................... 31 48 16 5 50 39 8 3
B-26

Table B-9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that focused on various

topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Addressing the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities

Total hours spent Total hours spent School and teacher characteristic

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 69 22 6 4 52 39 6 2

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 69 21 6 4 50 41 6 3

Middle school................................... 66 26 5 2 50 40 7 3

High school....................................... 68 22 5 4 59 33 6 1

Combined ......................................... 75 17 5 3 52 35 8 5

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 80 16 3 1 52 38 7 4

300 to 499......................................... 74 20 4 2 51 41 6 2

500 to 999......................................... 67 23 6 4 51 39 7 3

1,000 or more ................................... 60 26 9 6 57 35 6 2

Locale

Central city ....................................... 58 29 8 5 53 38 6 2

Urban fringe/large town................... 67 22 7 4 52 39 6 3

Rural/small town.............................. 82 15 2 2 53 38 7 2

Region

Northeast........................................... 78 17 3 2 51 39 7 3

Midwest ............................................ 78 17 3 2 54 38 6 3

South................................................. 67 23 6 3 51 40 7 2

West .................................................. 49 31 12 8 54 37 6 3

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 86 12 1 1 50 41 7 2

6 to 20 percent.................................. 71 23 3 3 53 38 6 3

21 to 50 percent................................ 66 24 6 4 54 37 7 2

More than 50 percent....................... 49 31 13 7 53 38 6 3

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 75 20 3 2 52 39 7 2

15 to 32 percent................................ 74 19 5 2 53 37 7 3

33 to 59 percent................................ 70 22 4 4 52 38 7 3

60 percent or more ........................... 56 27 11 6 52 40 6 3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 70 20 7 4 51 40 6 3

Math/science..................................... 74 21 3 2 58 36 4 2

Other targeted academic subject ..... 63 27 6 4 51 37 8 3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 64 25 8 4 51 39 7 3

4 to 9 years ....................................... 66 23 7 4 53 38 7 3

10 to 19 years................................... 64 25 7 4 50 40 8 3

20 or more years............................... 75 19 4 3 54 38 5 2

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 72 21 5 3 54 38 6 3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 50 36 10 4 46 41 10 3

Other ................................................. 44 28 17 11 44 44 10 1

Sex

Male .................................................. 67 23 6 4 55 37 6 2

Female............................................... 69 22 6 3 52 39 7 3

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each type of professional development program, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-27

Table B-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that

focused on various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

In-depth study in the subject area of

your main teaching assignment

New methods of teaching

(e.g., cooperative learning)

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.8 0.5

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.5 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.3 0.9

Middle school................................... 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.5 0.9

High school....................................... 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.2 0.8

Combined ......................................... 3.0 2.9 3.0 2.6 3.1 2.6 3.0 4.0

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.4 2.8 2.2 2.3 2.6 2.8 2.8 2.2

300 to 499......................................... 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.4 2.3 1.6 1.2

500 to 999......................................... 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.0 1.3 1.5 1.3 0.9

1,000 or more ................................... 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.4 1.1

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.9 1.6 1.0

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.7

Rural/small town.............................. 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.4 1.0

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.3 2.2 1.8 1.6 2.0 2.5 2.0 1.3

Midwest ............................................ 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.7 1.9 1.6 1.1

South................................................. 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.3 0.9

West .................................................. 2.0 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.7 2.1 1.9 1.3

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.1

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.4 0.9

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.7 2.1 1.7 1.5

More than 50 percent....................... 1.7 1.6 2.0 1.7 1.5 2.0 1.3 1.1

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.6 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.9 1.6 0.7

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.5 2.0 1.4 1.0

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.5 1.2

60 percent or more ........................... 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.3 1.6 1.2

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.3 0.9

Math/science..................................... 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.1 1.5 1.8 1.2 0.9

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.1 0.8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.0

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.5 2.0 1.8 1.1

10 to 19 years................................... 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.8 2.0 1.6 1.0

20 or more years............................... 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.3 0.9

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.8 1.1 0.8 0.5

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.4 3.6 3.7 3.6 2.9 3.4 3.1 2.7

Other ................................................. 2.9 3.3 2.9 3.4 2.6 3.9 3.0 2.8

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.0

Female............................................... 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.9 1.1 0.8 0.6
B-28

Table B-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that

focused on various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

(continued)

State or district curriculum and

performance standards

Integration of educational technology

in the grade or subject you teach

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 0.8 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.5

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.2 1.9 1.4 0.7 1.4 1.6 1.2 0.7

Middle school................................... 1.4 1.8 1.8 0.9 1.5 1.8 1.2 0.9

High school....................................... 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.8 1.5 1.7 1.3 0.9

Combined ......................................... 3.4 3.5 2.5 2.6 3.1 3.5 2.6 2.1

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.6 3.7 3.0 1.4 2.9 3.3 2.3 1.5

300 to 499......................................... 1.3 2.1 2.0 1.0 1.7 2.0 1.6 1.1

500 to 999......................................... 1.2 1.6 1.2 0.7 1.3 1.6 1.3 0.7

1,000 or more ................................... 1.5 1.7 1.2 1.0 1.5 1.8 1.3 1.0

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.5 2.0 1.8 0.9 1.6 2.1 1.3 0.9

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.5 1.6 1.3 0.7 1.5 1.5 1.4 0.8

Rural/small town.............................. 1.3 1.5 1.6 0.9 1.3 1.5 1.4 0.9

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.0 2.4 1.9 1.2 2.1 2.5 1.7 1.3

Midwest ............................................ 1.7 1.9 1.5 0.8 1.7 1.9 1.5 1.0

South................................................. 1.3 1.6 1.3 0.7 1.4 1.5 1.4 0.6

West .................................................. 1.8 2.4 2.2 1.4 2.2 2.5 2.1 1.2

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.0 1.7 1.9 1.5 1.0

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.5 1.9 1.6 1.0 1.6 1.7 1.3 0.8

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.7 2.2 1.5 1.1 1.7 2.2 1.8 1.1

More than 50 percent....................... 1.7 2.2 1.9 0.9 1.9 2.2 1.4 0.9

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.0 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.1

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.4 1.8 1.4 0.9 1.9 2.0 1.5 1.0

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.4 2.0 1.8 1.0 1.6 1.9 1.2 0.9

60 percent or more ........................... 1.5 2.3 1.9 0.8 1.9 2.1 1.8 0.9

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.4 2.0 1.4 0.7 1.4 1.7 1.1 0.7

Math/science..................................... 1.1 1.5 1.2 0.9 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.2

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.3 1.2 1.2 0.7 1.3 1.4 1.2 0.8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.5 2.1 1.7 0.8 1.8 2.5 1.8 1.0

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.5 2.2 1.7 1.3 1.9 1.9 1.6 1.2

10 to 19 years................................... 1.3 2.2 2.0 1.1 1.5 2.0 1.7 1.0

20 or more years............................... 1.4 1.4 1.6 0.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 0.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.8 1.2 0.9 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.5

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.3 5.0 3.8 1.9 2.5 3.9 3.5 1.7

Other ................................................. 3.0 4.5 3.2 2.4 2.9 3.6 3.1 1.9

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.5 1.6 1.4 0.7 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.1

Female............................................... 1.0 1.4 1.1 0.5 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.5
B-29

Table B-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that

focused on various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

(continued)

Student performance assessment Classroom management,

including student discipline

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.5 1.6 1.3 0.7 1.6 1.7 0.8 0.6

Middle school................................... 1.7 1.7 1.1 0.7 1.7 1.6 0.9 0.6

High school....................................... 1.7 1.5 1.1 0.6 1.5 1.2 0.7 0.5

Combined ......................................... 3.6 3.2 2.2 1.6 3.7 2.7 1.8 1.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 3.1 3.2 1.8 1.3 3.3 3.0 1.8 0.5

300 to 499......................................... 2.2 2.3 1.7 0.9 2.0 2.3 1.0 0.8

500 to 999......................................... 1.5 1.4 1.1 0.7 1.4 1.4 0.7 0.6

1,000 or more ................................... 1.7 1.7 1.3 0.7 1.6 1.6 0.7 0.7

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.6 1.8 1.4 0.8 2.1 2.2 1.0 0.6

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.7 1.5 1.3 0.8 0.5

Rural/small town.............................. 1.5 1.3 1.1 0.8 1.6 1.7 0.9 0.5

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.2 2.1 1.6 1.2 2.0 1.9 1.0 0.9

Midwest ............................................ 1.8 1.8 1.1 0.7 2.0 2.1 0.9 0.4

South................................................. 1.6 1.7 1.2 0.7 1.8 1.7 0.8 0.7

West .................................................. 2.5 2.3 2.0 1.4 2.1 2.3 1.0 0.7

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 2.0 1.8 1.3 0.8 2.0 1.7 0.7 0.5

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.7 2.0 1.4 0.8 1.5 1.6 0.9 0.8

21 to 50 percent................................ 2.1 1.8 1.4 1.2 1.9 2.1 1.1 0.6

More than 50 percent....................... 1.7 1.8 1.5 0.9 2.2 2.5 1.2 0.8

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.8 1.8 1.4 0.7 1.8 1.4 0.8 0.6

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.8 1.6 1.3 0.7 1.6 1.5 0.8 0.4

33 to 59 percent................................ 2.2 2.2 1.6 0.9 2.1 1.9 1.0 0.7

60 percent or more ........................... 1.8 1.5 1.5 0.9 2.2 2.3 1.2 0.8

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.5 1.5 1.3 0.7 1.5 1.7 0.8 0.5

Math/science..................................... 1.6 1.8 1.2 0.6 1.6 1.7 0.8 0.4

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.7 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.5 1.7 1.6 0.8 1.8 1.8 1.5 0.9

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.8 2.2 1.7 1.1 1.9 1.8 1.0 0.8

10 to 19 years................................... 1.7 2.2 1.2 0.9 1.9 1.8 1.0 0.6

20 or more years............................... 1.6 1.5 1.0 0.8 1.3 1.3 0.8 0.6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.0 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.4

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.5 3.9 3.1 2.1 4.0 4.3 2.6 1.9

Other ................................................. 4.1 3.7 3.6 2.1 3.7 4.2 2.3 1.7

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.6 1.7 1.1 0.7 1.8 1.9 0.7 0.6

Female............................................... 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.5 1.1 1.2 0.5 0.4
B-30

Table B-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities of various lengths in the last 12 months that

focused on various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

(continued)

Addressing the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities

Total hours spent Total hours spent School and teacher characteristic

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.4 1.1 0.9 0.4 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.7 1.3 0.7 0.7 1.7 1.5 0.7 0.5

Middle school................................... 1.7 1.5 0.7 0.5 1.7 1.5 0.8 0.6

High school....................................... 1.7 1.4 0.8 0.6 1.9 1.7 0.7 0.3

Combined ......................................... 3.7 3.2 1.6 1.4 2.6 3.3 1.9 1.6

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 3.1 2.3 1.1 0.8 3.3 3.0 1.5 1.1

300 to 499......................................... 2.1 1.7 0.8 0.7 2.3 2.3 1.0 0.6

500 to 999......................................... 1.8 1.3 0.6 0.8 1.7 1.6 0.7 0.5

1,000 or more ................................... 1.7 1.7 1.1 0.7 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.4

Locale

Central city ....................................... 2.0 1.7 1.0 0.9 1.9 1.6 0.9 0.5

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.7 1.8 1.6 0.7 0.5

Rural/small town.............................. 1.5 1.3 0.4 0.4 1.7 1.5 0.6 0.4

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.2 1.7 0.7 0.6 2.7 2.7 1.0 0.9

Midwest ............................................ 1.9 1.6 0.6 0.6 1.7 2.0 0.7 0.6

South................................................. 1.7 1.5 0.8 0.6 1.9 1.7 0.8 0.4

West .................................................. 2.4 1.9 1.3 1.4 2.0 1.9 1.1 0.7

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.5 1.3 0.3 0.3 1.9 2.0 0.8 0.5

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.9 1.7 0.6 0.5 2.2 2.1 0.8 0.6

21 to 50 percent................................ 2.0 1.7 1.0 0.9 2.4 2.4 1.0 0.5

More than 50 percent....................... 2.5 2.0 1.1 1.1 2.1 1.7 1.0 0.6

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.7 1.5 0.6 0.3 2.4 2.1 0.9 0.5

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.8 1.6 0.9 0.6 1.9 1.8 0.8 0.7

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.9 1.4 0.7 0.8 1.7 1.7 0.9 0.6

60 percent or more ........................... 2.3 1.9 1.1 1.1 2.4 2.1 0.9 0.6

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.7 1.3 0.7 0.7 1.8 1.6 0.7 0.5

Math/science..................................... 1.6 1.4 0.7 0.5 1.6 1.6 0.6 0.4

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.6 1.5 0.8 0.4 1.8 1.5 0.9 0.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.2 1.8 1.0 0.8 1.7 1.6 1.0 0.7

4 to 9 years ....................................... 2.2 1.9 1.0 0.8 2.6 2.4 0.8 0.6

10 to 19 years................................... 2.1 1.7 1.0 0.8 2.1 1.7 1.0 0.6

20 or more years............................... 1.4 1.1 0.5 0.6 1.6 1.5 0.7 0.5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.1 0.9 0.4 0.4 1.2 1.2 0.4 0.3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.5 3.6 2.5 1.9 3.5 3.9 2.5 1.2

Other ................................................. 4.0 3.8 2.9 2.6 3.1 3.1 2.3 0.9

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.6 1.5 0.7 0.6 1.9 1.8 0.7 0.6

Female............................................... 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.6 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.3

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-31

Table B-10.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

In-depth study in the subject area of

your main teaching assignment

New methods of teaching

(e.g., cooperative learning)

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 28 44 26 2 22 42 31 4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 30 44 25 1 27 43 27 3

Middle school................................... 25 46 27 2 18 43 35 5

High school....................................... 29 41 27 3 18 40 37 5

Combined ......................................... 27 44 27 2 13 36 44 7

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 30 36 30 4 23 36 38 3

300 to 499......................................... 33 40 26 1 25 43 28 3

500 to 999......................................... 26 48 24 2 23 43 30 4

1,000 or more ................................... 28 41 28 3 19 41 34 6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 28 43 26 3 25 42 29 4

Urban fringe/large town................... 30 44 25 1 24 42 30 5

Rural/small town.............................. 27 44 27 2 19 42 35 4

Region

Northeast........................................... 29 44 25 2 22 43 32 3

Midwest ............................................ 25 45 28 2 22 41 34 4

South................................................. 27 45 26 2 22 42 31 5

West .................................................. 36 38 25 1 25 44 28 4

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 24 46 26 3 19 43 35 4

6 to 20 percent.................................. 27 44 28 1 20 42 33 6

21 to 50 percent................................ 31 43 24 1 24 42 30 3

More than 50 percent....................... 31 41 25 3 27 41 28 4

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 29 44 26 2 20 41 32 6

15 to 32 percent................................ 28 45 25 1 18 46 32 4

33 to 59 percent................................ 26 44 27 3 24 39 33 5

60 percent or more ........................... 31 42 26 1 28 42 28 2

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 30 44 25 1 27 43 26 3

Math/science..................................... 26 40 31 3 16 39 40 5

Other targeted academic subject ..... 27 45 24 3 19 42 34 5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 33 42 23 2 24 48 25 3

4 to 9 years ....................................... 31 42 26 1 24 40 33 3

10 to 19 years................................... 28 43 27 2 23 42 31 4

20 or more years............................... 26 46 26 2 21 41 34 5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 27 45 26 2 20 43 33 4

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 36 34 28 2 41 33 24 1

Other ................................................. 38 43 17 2 32 45 17 7

Sex

Male .................................................. 23 43 32 3 16 38 37 8

Female............................................... 30 44 24 2 24 43 29 3
B-32

Table B-10.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998 (continued)

State or district curriculum and

performance standards

Integration of educational technology

in the grade or subject you teach

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 12 36 39 13 21 38 34 6

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 14 40 38 8 23 40 33 4

Middle school................................... 13 33 41 13 18 36 39 6

High school....................................... 7 28 40 24 21 36 34 10

Combined ......................................... 8 35 39 18 18 43 31 8

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 12 35 43 10 20 41 34 5

300 to 499......................................... 12 35 42 11 21 41 33 5

500 to 999......................................... 13 39 37 12 22 39 34 5

1,000 or more ................................... 10 32 39 20 22 34 34 9

Locale

Central city ....................................... 14 37 36 12 24 36 34 7

Urban fringe/large town................... 11 37 39 13 21 38 35 5

Rural/small town.............................. 12 33 41 14 20 41 33 6

Region

Northeast........................................... 13 35 39 13 20 39 35 6

Midwest ............................................ 12 34 38 16 21 37 35 6

South................................................. 11 38 41 11 22 39 33 6

West .................................................. 13 37 36 14 21 38 34 7

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 12 30 42 16 21 39 36 4

6 to 20 percent.................................. 11 37 39 14 19 40 33 7

21 to 50 percent................................ 12 37 39 12 23 37 34 5

More than 50 percent....................... 14 40 36 10 22 37 33 8

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 11 32 40 17 23 37 33 7

15 to 32 percent................................ 10 38 39 14 18 42 34 6

33 to 59 percent................................ 12 36 40 12 22 35 37 6

60 percent or more ........................... 15 39 37 9 23 39 32 5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 14 40 38 8 22 40 33 5

Math/science..................................... 10 32 39 19 22 36 34 8

Other targeted academic subject ..... 10 32 40 18 20 38 35 7

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 12 39 39 10 19 38 37 6

4 to 9 years ....................................... 12 38 40 10 23 37 34 6

10 to 19 years................................... 14 33 39 14 23 39 32 6

20 or more years............................... 11 35 39 16 21 39 34 6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 11 35 40 14 20 39 34 6

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 22 44 30 3 33 34 30 2

Other ................................................. 17 34 34 14 25 33 34 8

Sex

Male .................................................. 8 30 43 18 20 37 35 8

Female............................................... 13 38 38 12 22 39 34 6
B-33

Table B-10.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Student performance assessment Classroom management,

including student discipline

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 17 39 38 6 19 39 35 7

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 21 40 35 5 20 42 31 6

Middle school................................... 14 37 43 6 20 39 35 6

High school....................................... 11 35 43 10 15 32 42 11

Combined ......................................... 13 45 35 8 13 39 45 3

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 16 42 38 4 15 38 42 5

300 to 499......................................... 18 40 37 5 23 39 33 6

500 to 999......................................... 18 39 37 6 19 43 30 8

1,000 or more ................................... 15 35 40 9 15 34 42 9

Locale

Central city ....................................... 19 36 39 5 21 39 31 9

Urban fringe/large town................... 18 40 35 6 19 42 32 6

Rural/small town.............................. 14 39 40 7 16 37 41 6

Region

Northeast........................................... 18 40 38 4 20 37 35 8

Midwest ............................................ 14 39 40 8 18 35 40 7

South ................................................. 19 38 37 6 19 42 32 7

West .................................................. 18 39 37 7 18 40 34 8

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 14 38 42 6 13 37 44 6

6 to 20 percent.................................. 17 38 38 7 18 40 34 7

21 to 50 percent................................ 18 40 37 5 17 42 35 7

More than 50 percent....................... 21 38 36 6 25 40 27 8

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 18 37 38 7 18 39 36 7

15 to 32 percent................................ 13 43 37 6 13 42 39 5

33 to 59 percent................................ 18 36 40 6 18 39 34 9

60 percent or more ........................... 20 39 36 5 24 39 30 7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 21 39 35 5 21 40 32 6

Math/science..................................... 12 33 46 9 16 39 36 9

Other targeted academic subject ..... 15 40 38 7 17 38 38 7

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 20 39 36 5 28 39 30 3

4 to 9 years ....................................... 16 40 38 7 18 43 35 4

10 to 19 years................................... 18 38 36 7 17 37 38 8

20 or more years............................... 17 38 40 5 16 40 34 10

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 15 39 40 6 16 39 37 8

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 36 37 24 3 36 39 20 5

Other ................................................. 26 37 30 7 27 40 30 4

Sex

Male .................................................. 13 36 42 9 13 36 41 10

Female............................................... 19 39 37 5 21 41 33 6
B-34

Table B-10.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they

believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Addressing the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities

Improved my teaching Improved my teaching School and teacher characteristic

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 18 34 40 9 14 36 44 6

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 20 33 38 8 15 37 43 5

Middle school................................... 14 36 40 10 16 35 44 5

High school....................................... 18 32 42 8 11 36 46 8

Combined ......................................... 11 35 43 11 9 30 50 12

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 17 25 48 10 15 33 47 5

300 to 499......................................... 21 31 39 8 16 32 47 5

500 to 999......................................... 17 35 38 9 13 40 40 7

1,000 or more ................................... 16 34 41 8 14 31 47 7

Locale

Central city ....................................... 17 33 39 11 13 36 44 6

Urban fringe/large town................... 19 34 41 7 17 36 42 5

Rural/small town.............................. 17 36 40 7 12 35 46 7

Region

Northeast........................................... 16 37 38 8 17 30 44 8

Midwest ............................................ 17 28 45 10 14 35 46 6

South................................................. 17 36 38 9 15 38 42 6

West .................................................. 20 32 40 8 11 38 46 6

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 18 26 42 13 14 35 43 7

6 to 20 percent.................................. 15 34 44 8 16 35 44 5

21 to 50 percent................................ 15 36 42 7 13 39 44 4

More than 50 percent....................... 21 35 35 9 14 34 44 8

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 17 31 44 8 18 35 40 6

15 to 32 percent................................ 14 33 44 9 14 34 47 6

33 to 59 percent................................ 12 34 43 11 13 37 45 5

60 percent or more ........................... 24 36 33 8 13 37 44 7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 21 33 38 9 15 35 44 5

Math/science..................................... 10 35 45 10 9 34 51 5

Other targeted academic subject ..... 17 35 40 8 16 37 39 8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 18 36 38 8 18 34 42 6

4 to 9 years ....................................... 17 33 40 10 13 37 43 7

10 to 19 years................................... 17 35 37 10 15 37 42 6

20 or more years............................... 18 31 43 7 13 35 47 6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 15 34 43 9 14 36 45 5

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 28 29 33 10 26 28 36 10

Other ................................................. 28 38 28 6 8 41 41 9

Sex

Male .................................................. 16 29 44 11 10 33 48 8

Female............................................... 18 35 38 8 15 37 43 5

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each type of professional development program, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-35

Table B-10a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998

In-depth study in the subject area of

your main teaching assignment

New methods of teaching

(e.g., cooperative learning)

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.6 1.8 1.4 0.4 1.5 1.7 1.7 0.6

Middle school................................... 2.2 2.2 1.9 0.6 1.6 1.8 2.2 0.8

High school....................................... 1.5 1.8 1.2 0.5 1.3 1.8 1.8 0.8

Combined ......................................... 3.8 3.8 3.9 1.5 2.9 4.9 4.1 2.0

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 3.8 3.3 2.8 1.4 3.4 3.7 3.8 1.1

300 to 499......................................... 2.9 2.7 2.3 0.3 2.5 2.7 3.0 0.9

500 to 999......................................... 1.7 1.9 1.6 0.4 1.4 1.6 1.5 0.6

1,000 or more ................................... 2.3 2.2 1.7 0.6 1.6 2.0 1.9 1.0

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.7 1.7 1.6 0.6 1.8 1.7 1.4 0.7

Urban fringe/large town................... 2.0 2.2 1.6 0.3 1.5 1.9 1.5 0.6

Rural/small town.............................. 1.7 1.9 1.8 0.6 1.4 2.1 1.7 0.8

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.8 2.3 2.5 0.7 2.0 2.1 2.2 0.7

Midwest ............................................ 2.2 2.2 1.8 0.7 1.8 2.2 2.1 1.0

South................................................. 1.8 1.5 1.7 0.5 1.4 1.9 1.6 0.7

West .................................................. 2.3 2.5 1.5 0.4 2.2 2.6 2.0 0.9

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.9 2.2 1.9 0.8 1.8 2.3 2.1 0.8

6 to 20 percent.................................. 2.5 2.1 2.0 0.4 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.0

21 to 50 percent................................ 2.3 2.4 2.1 0.4 2.2 2.1 2.0 0.8

More than 50 percent....................... 2.0 1.6 1.9 0.6 2.1 2.4 1.9 0.8

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 2.3 2.5 2.0 0.6 1.6 2.1 1.8 1.0

15 to 32 percent................................ 2.1 2.1 1.8 0.3 1.6 2.2 1.9 0.7

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.8 2.0 1.9 0.8 2.0 1.7 1.8 0.9

60 percent or more ........................... 2.1 2.1 2.0 0.4 1.9 2.3 2.0 0.5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.6 1.9 1.5 0.4 1.4 1.7 1.7 0.6

Math/science..................................... 2.2 2.1 2.0 0.6 2.1 2.1 2.1 1.1

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.4 1.4 1.3 0.6 1.2 1.8 1.7 0.8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.9 2.3 2.0 0.5 1.7 2.2 1.8 0.7

4 to 9 years ....................................... 2.5 2.5 2.0 0.4 1.7 2.3 2.1 0.8

10 to 19 years................................... 2.1 2.3 2.3 0.6 2.1 2.3 2.2 0.7

20 or more years............................... 2.0 1.9 1.5 0.6 1.5 1.5 1.8 0.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.3 0.9 1.2 1.1 0.5

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 4.1 3.3 3.9 0.8 4.7 3.6 3.4 0.7

Other ................................................. 4.5 4.2 3.6 1.3 4.4 4.3 2.9 1.9

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.7 2.2 1.9 0.7 1.4 1.8 1.9 1.1

Female............................................... 1.4 1.4 1.3 0.4 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.4
B-36

Table B-10a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

State or district curriculum and

performance standards

Integration of educational technology

in the grade or subject you teach

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 0.6 1.1 1.1 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 0.9 1.9 1.7 1.1 1.6 1.7 1.6 0.8

Middle school................................... 1.2 2.0 1.9 1.4 1.8 1.8 1.9 0.9

High school....................................... 0.9 1.6 1.7 1.4 1.4 2.0 1.9 1.0

Combined ......................................... 2.3 4.0 4.1 2.6 3.5 3.5 3.3 1.9

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.1 3.7 3.5 1.8 3.1 3.4 2.8 1.3

300 to 499......................................... 1.7 2.3 2.2 1.2 2.1 2.3 2.1 0.9

500 to 999......................................... 1.2 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.5 1.4 1.4 0.7

1,000 or more ................................... 1.5 1.7 1.9 1.4 1.6 1.9 2.1 1.3

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.3 2.0 1.8 1.2 1.8 1.6 2.0 1.1

Urban fringe/large town................... 0.9 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.3 0.7

Rural/small town.............................. 1.1 1.8 1.9 1.3 1.7 2.1 1.8 0.9

Region

Northeast........................................... 1.8 2.3 2.0 1.6 2.0 2.6 2.4 1.2

Midwest ............................................ 1.4 1.9 2.3 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.5 1.1

South................................................. 0.9 1.8 1.7 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.7 0.8

West .................................................. 1.6 2.4 2.2 1.8 2.1 2.3 2.4 1.2

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.5 2.0 2.2 1.5 1.9 2.0 2.0 0.7

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.3 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.9 2.3 2.2 1.3

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.4 2.2 2.1 1.4 2.2 2.1 1.8 1.1

More than 50 percent....................... 1.4 2.4 1.8 1.3 2.2 1.9 2.1 1.3

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.3 2.0 2.2 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.8 0.8

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.3 2.0 2.4 1.1 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.1

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.3 2.0 2.0 2.3 1.0

60 percent or more ........................... 1.6 2.7 2.2 1.3 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.1

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.0 1.9 1.8 1.2 1.6 1.7 1.7 0.8

Math/science..................................... 1.5 2.0 1.9 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 1.2

Other targeted academic subject ..... 0.9 1.6 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.6 0.9

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.3 2.0 2.3 1.2 1.8 2.0 2.1 1.0

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.6 2.7 2.1 1.3 1.9 2.3 2.2 1.2

10 to 19 years................................... 1.5 1.7 2.4 1.5 1.6 2.4 2.1 1.0

20 or more years............................... 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.2 1.8 1.7 2.0 0.8

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.7 1.2 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.6

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 2.9 4.3 4.4 1.0 4.2 4.2 3.5 1.1

Other ................................................. 3.7 3.5 3.9 2.9 3.6 3.6 4.2 2.2

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.1 2.1 2.1 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.0

Female............................................... 0.7 1.2 1.3 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.2 0.6
B-37

Table B-10a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Student performance assessment Classroom management,

including student discipline

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.3 0.8

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.5 1.9 1.9 0.9 1.6 1.5 1.8 1.1

Middle school................................... 1.5 2.5 2.2 1.0 1.9 2.1 2.0 1.3

High school....................................... 1.3 2.2 1.8 1.2 1.5 2.2 2.3 1.4

Combined ......................................... 2.9 5.4 4.7 2.4 3.2 5.0 5.5 1.6

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 3.1 4.2 4.5 1.5 3.7 4.5 4.2 2.0

300 to 499......................................... 2.2 2.5 2.4 1.1 3.0 2.6 2.6 1.4

500 to 999......................................... 1.1 2.0 1.8 0.9 1.7 1.7 2.0 1.2

1,000 or more ................................... 1.5 2.2 2.2 1.1 1.9 2.4 2.7 1.5

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.6 2.0 2.3 0.8 2.1 2.6 2.2 1.1

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.5 2.1 1.4 0.8 1.9 2.1 2.0 1.2

Rural/small town.............................. 1.5 2.4 2.2 1.2 1.8 1.9 2.6 1.2

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.5 3.1 3.0 1.0 2.6 2.4 2.6 1.9

Midwest ............................................ 1.8 2.4 2.4 1.4 2.4 2.6 2.9 1.7

South................................................. 1.4 1.8 1.9 0.8 1.9 1.9 2.3 1.0

West .................................................. 2.0 2.8 2.6 1.2 2.5 3.1 3.1 1.8

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.7 2.5 2.4 1.4 2.0 2.8 3.1 1.8

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.2 2.1 2.3 2.6 1.7

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.7 2.2 2.3 0.9 2.0 2.6 2.5 1.6

More than 50 percent....................... 2.0 2.5 2.3 0.9 2.2 2.7 2.3 1.4

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 2.2 2.7 2.3 1.2 2.2 2.7 2.8 2.1

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.7 2.1 2.4 1.0 2.0 2.6 2.8 1.4

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.8 2.2 2.3 1.3 1.6 2.4 2.4 1.5

60 percent or more ........................... 1.8 2.6 2.5 0.8 2.2 2.5 2.5 1.3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.5 1.8 1.8 0.9 1.6 1.6 1.9 1.1

Math/science..................................... 1.8 1.7 2.1 1.3 1.9 2.8 2.5 1.5

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.1 2.0 1.7 0.8 1.5 2.2 1.9 1.1

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.0 2.3 2.4 0.9 2.3 2.3 2.0 0.8

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.9 2.5 2.4 1.2 2.3 2.8 3.1 1.1

10 to 19 years................................... 1.9 2.4 2.3 1.3 2.4 2.9 3.6 1.6

20 or more years............................... 1.6 1.7 1.8 0.8 2.2 2.3 2.4 1.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.0 1.3 1.2 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.4 0.9

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 4.2 4.6 3.9 1.3 5.2 5.2 3.5 1.8

Other ................................................. 4.2 4.8 4.5 2.1 4.8 4.9 4.9 2.2

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.7 2.2 2.1 1.1 1.9 2.6 2.6 1.4

Female............................................... 1.0 1.4 1.4 0.7 1.3 1.2 1.5 0.8
B-38

Table B-10a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Addressing the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities

Improved my teaching Improved my teaching School and teacher characteristic

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 1.4 1.6 1.6 0.9 0.9 1.6 1.6 0.6

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 2.4 2.6 2.6 1.4 1.5 2.5 2.3 1.0

Middle school................................... 1.9 2.9 3.5 1.9 1.7 2.2 2.4 1.1

High school....................................... 1.9 2.4 2.5 1.4 1.4 2.3 2.5 1.4

Combined ......................................... 4.3 6.4 6.8 3.9 3.4 4.6 4.4 3.5

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 6.4 5.7 5.9 3.8 2.9 3.9 4.2 1.6

300 to 499......................................... 3.3 3.8 3.8 2.1 2.7 3.4 3.2 1.2

500 to 999......................................... 1.9 2.4 2.4 1.4 1.4 2.1 1.9 1.1

1,000 or more ................................... 2.1 2.3 2.1 1.3 1.9 2.3 2.5 1.6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 2.1 2.6 2.9 1.7 1.7 2.4 2.6 1.3

Urban fringe/large town................... 2.3 2.6 2.8 1.1 1.4 2.4 2.3 1.1

Rural/small town.............................. 2.6 3.4 3.5 1.9 1.6 2.5 2.2 1.3

Region

Northeast........................................... 3.1 4.5 4.1 2.7 3.0 2.8 3.7 1.8

Midwest ............................................ 2.6 4.1 4.1 2.1 2.0 2.8 2.5 1.1

South................................................. 2.3 2.2 2.6 1.5 1.2 2.0 2.1 1.0

West .................................................. 3.0 3.0 2.9 1.4 2.1 3.2 3.3 1.7

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 3.9 3.7 4.7 3.7 2.0 2.3 2.4 1.2

6 to 20 percent.................................. 3.0 4.2 3.9 1.7 2.2 3.4 3.4 1.1

21 to 50 percent................................ 2.8 3.2 3.5 1.5 1.6 2.4 2.3 1.1

More than 50 percent....................... 2.4 3.0 2.5 1.7 1.9 2.4 2.9 1.5

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 2.6 3.4 3.9 1.8 2.1 3.3 3.2 1.3

15 to 32 percent................................ 2.7 3.1 3.6 2.1 1.6 2.3 2.8 1.3

33 to 59 percent................................ 2.2 3.5 3.4 1.8 2.1 2.8 3.3 1.1

60 percent or more ........................... 2.8 2.8 2.6 1.7 1.9 3.0 3.2 1.4

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 2.4 2.6 2.6 1.3 1.5 2.6 2.3 1.0

Math/science..................................... 1.9 3.4 3.3 1.5 1.9 2.3 3.1 1.1

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.8 2.1 2.4 1.4 1.5 2.5 2.5 1.2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.3 3.6 3.4 1.7 2.2 3.1 3.2 1.6

4 to 9 years ....................................... 3.1 3.2 3.8 2.0 1.8 2.5 3.0 1.6

10 to 19 years................................... 2.5 3.6 3.1 1.9 2.3 2.6 2.7 1.5

20 or more years............................... 2.5 2.9 3.2 1.6 1.8 2.4 2.6 1.0

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.6 1.9 1.9 0.9 1.1 1.8 1.8 0.6

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 5.2 5.0 4.9 3.5 5.0 3.6 5.5 3.4

Other ................................................. 5.4 5.0 5.3 2.4 2.5 5.1 4.5 3.1

Sex

Male .................................................. 2.5 2.6 2.5 1.9 1.3 2.5 2.7 1.5

Female............................................... 1.6 1.9 2.1 1.0 1.1 2.0 1.7 0.7

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-39

Table B-11.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated with various frequency in the last 12

months in various activities related to teaching, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

Common planning period for team teachers Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers,

excluding meetings held for administrative purposes

School and teacher Frequency of activity Frequency of activity

characteristic

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

All targeted public school

teachers1

........................... 38 9 7 9 38 19 19 17 18 27

School instructional level

Elementary school..................... 27 11 9 12 40 15 18 18 20 29

Middle school............................ 21 4 3 8 64 13 15 18 18 36

High school ............................... 69 8 4 5 15 29 23 16 13 19

Combined .................................. 65 10 4 4 16 30 27 14 11 18

School enrollment size

Less than 300 ............................ 44 6 6 10 34 28 20 13 15 24

300 to 499.................................. 32 10 7 9 41 16 21 18 16 29

500 to 999.................................. 31 10 7 10 42 16 17 17 20 29

1,000 or more ............................ 54 7 6 6 27 24 19 19 15 24

Locale

Central city ................................ 34 9 8 9 40 16 17 18 21 28

Urban fringe/large town ........... 35 10 6 9 39 19 18 18 17 28

Rural/small town....................... 44 8 5 8 34 22 22 15 15 26

Region

Northeast ................................... 39 8 4 11 39 21 18 15 16 31

Midwest..................................... 42 9 5 8 35 20 23 17 16 23

South.......................................... 35 9 6 8 42 18 17 17 18 30

West ........................................... 35 10 12 12 31 18 19 21 19 24

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 45 8 4 9 34 21 24 15 15 26

6 to 20 percent........................... 35 9 7 9 40 18 20 18 19 26

21 to 50 percent......................... 37 9 7 9 38 19 17 16 18 30

More than 50 percent................ 33 10 8 10 38 17 15 20 19 28

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 42 7 6 8 37 19 21 18 16 26

15 to 32 percent......................... 39 10 7 9 36 21 21 16 17 26

33 to 59 percent......................... 40 8 6 9 37 17 20 16 19 27

60 percent or more .................... 29 11 8 10 41 19 14 19 18 30

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................. 28 11 10 12 39 15 18 17 20 30

Math/science ............................. 48 6 3 6 37 23 19 18 15 24

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 47 8 4 5 36 22 21 17 15 26

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 39 7 7 9 38 19 14 16 19 32

4 to 9 years................................ 35 8 8 8 40 18 18 18 18 28

10 to 19 years............................ 36 10 6 8 39 18 22 18 15 28

20 or more years........................ 40 10 6 10 35 20 20 17 18 25

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic................. 39 9 6 9 37 19 20 17 17 27

Black, non-Hispanic ................. 35 9 7 9 41 14 11 18 23 34

Other.......................................... 26 12 10 12 40 17 20 17 22 24

Sex

Male ........................................... 49 9 5 7 30 22 20 18 15 25

Female ....................................... 34 9 7 10 40 18 18 17 18 28
B-40

Table B-11.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated with various frequency in the last 12

months in various activities related to teaching, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

(continued)

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship

Frequency of activity Frequency of activity School and teacher

characteristic

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

All targeted public school

teachers1

........................... 81 9 3 3 5 74 7 3 4 11

School instructional level

Elementary school..................... 81 9 2 4 4 74 8 3 4 11

Middle school............................ 80 8 4 3 5 73 7 3 5 12

High school ............................... 82 9 2 3 4 76 7 4 4 10

Combined .................................. 80 10 3 3 5 75 8 4 7 7

School enrollment size

Less than 300 ............................ 84 9 2 2 4 78 8 1 3 10

300 to 499.................................. 82 8 2 2 5 78 5 3 4 11

500 to 999.................................. 80 9 3 4 4 72 9 3 5 11

1,000 or more ............................ 80 9 3 3 4 74 7 4 5 10

Locale

Central city ................................ 78 9 3 4 5 71 8 4 5 13

Urban fringe/large town ........... 82 8 2 3 5 74 8 3 4 11

Rural/small town....................... 82 9 2 2 4 78 7 3 4 8

Region

Northeast ................................... 86 7 2 2 4 76 5 2 4 12

Midwest..................................... 87 5 2 2 3 78 6 2 3 10

South.......................................... 77 10 3 4 6 71 9 4 5 11

West ........................................... 76 12 3 5 4 74 8 4 4 10

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 85 8 2 2 4 79 6 3 4 8

6 to 20 percent........................... 85 6 2 2 4 77 6 3 4 11

21 to 50 percent......................... 80 10 2 3 5 71 8 3 5 12

More than 50 percent................ 73 12 4 6 6 69 10 4 5 12

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 84 7 2 3 4 75 7 3 4 12

15 to 32 percent......................... 84 8 2 2 4 76 7 3 5 10

33 to 59 percent......................... 82 8 2 4 4 74 8 4 3 11

60 percent or more .................... 74 11 4 4 6 72 9 3 5 11

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................. 81 9 3 3 4 74 8 3 4 11

Math/science ............................. 81 9 3 3 4 76 7 4 4 9

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 81 8 3 3 5 74 8 3 5 11

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 42 18 8 14 18 88 5 2 2 2

4 to 9 years................................ 79 11 3 4 4 75 7 3 5 10

10 to 19 years............................ 88 7 1 1 2 68 9 4 5 14

20 or more years........................ 91 5 1 1 2 73 8 3 4 12

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic................. 83 8 2 3 4 75 7 3 4 10

Black, non-Hispanic ................. 64 11 4 7 14 61 9 8 6 16

Other.......................................... 72 12 3 5 8 75 7 4 3 10

Sex

Male ........................................... 79 10 3 4 5 79 7 3 4 7

Female ....................................... 81 8 3 3 4 73 8 3 5 12
B-41

Table B-11.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated with various frequency in the last 12

months in various activities related to teaching, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

(continued)

Networking with teachers outside your school Individual or collaborative research on a

topic of interest to you professionally

School and teacher Frequency of activity Frequency of activity

characteristic

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 39 37 11 7 6 47 25 8 9 10

School instructional level

Elementary school..................... 38 37 11 7 7 47 26 8 9 10

Middle school............................ 37 37 11 9 6 43 28 7 10 11

High school ............................... 41 35 11 7 6 50 23 8 9 11

Combined .................................. 39 39 10 5 7 46 20 11 9 14

School enrollment size

Less than 300 ............................ 44 37 7 7 5 50 23 8 10 9

300 to 499.................................. 39 39 10 5 7 46 26 9 9 10

500 to 999.................................. 38 36 12 8 6 46 26 8 9 10

1,000 or more ............................ 37 35 12 9 7 47 24 8 10 11

Locale

Central city ................................ 34 37 12 8 9 46 25 9 10 11

Urban fringe/large town ........... 36 38 12 8 5 46 26 9 9 10

Rural/small town....................... 46 35 8 5 5 49 24 8 9 9

Region

Northeast ................................... 39 38 9 8 7 42 27 7 13 12

Midwest..................................... 41 35 10 8 6 49 25 7 8 10

South.......................................... 42 36 11 6 5 49 25 8 8 9

West ........................................... 30 39 14 8 9 43 24 11 11 12

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 45 37 8 5 5 49 25 7 9 10

6 to 20 percent........................... 36 40 12 7 5 46 26 9 8 11

21 to 50 percent......................... 39 35 11 9 7 47 24 8 10 10

More than 50 percent................ 35 35 12 9 9 46 26 9 10 10

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent .................

15 to 32 percent......................... 35 39 12 8 6 44 27 8 9 12

33 to 59 percent......................... 41 36 11 6 6 48 24 9 10 10

60 percent or more .................... 41 36 9 7 7 50 24 7 10 10

39 36 11 8 7 46 26 10 9 9

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................. 38 36 11 8 7 46 26 9 9 9

Math/science ............................. 39 37 12 7 6 54 22 6 8 11

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 40 37 10 7 6 43 26 9 11 11

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 34 32 14 9 10 45 23 12 9 12

4 to 9 years................................ 32 38 16 8 6 40 30 8 10 11

10 to 19 years............................ 37 40 10 8 6 48 23 8 10 11

20 or more years........................ 46 35 8 6 6 51 25 7 9 8

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic................. 39 37 11 7 6 47 25 8 10 10

Black, non-Hispanic ................. 33 34 13 12 8 43 28 14 7 9

Other.......................................... 39 32 13 9 8 43 24 10 9 14

Sex

Male ........................................... 44 31 10 7 8 50 20 8 9 13

Female ....................................... 37 39 11 7 6 46 27 8 10 9

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in English/language arts, social

studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional level.

Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each type of professional development program, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional Development and

Training, 1998.
B-42

Table B-11a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated with various

frequency in the last 12 months in various activities related to teaching, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998

Common planning period for team teachers Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers,

excluding meetings held for administrative purposes

School and teacher Frequency of activity Frequency of activity

characteristic

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.9

School instructional level

Elementary school..................... 1.3 1.2 0.9 1.0 1.6 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4

Middle school............................ 1.6 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.7 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.9

High school ............................... 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.7 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.3

Combined .................................. 4.3 2.3 1.7 1.3 3.3 3.5 3.3 2.0 2.6 4.0

School enrollment size

Less than 300 ............................ 3.1 1.3 1.5 2.3 3.1 2.7 3.1 2.0 2.4 2.8

300 to 499.................................. 1.9 1.6 1.2 1.4 2.5 1.6 2.1 1.5 1.6 1.9

500 to 999.................................. 1.5 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.6 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.3

1,000 or more ............................ 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.5

Locale

Central city ................................ 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.7 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4

Urban fringe/large town ........... 1.7 1.2 0.9 1.1 1.7 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.4

Rural/small town....................... 1.9 0.9 0.8 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.5

Region

Northeast ................................... 2.3 1.2 1.1 1.7 2.6 1.9 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2

Midwest..................................... 1.7 1.1 0.9 1.0 2.0 1.6 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.8

South.......................................... 1.6 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.4 1.2 1.7

West ........................................... 2.5 2.0 1.4 1.5 2.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.7

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 2.2 0.9 0.7 1.2 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.5

6 to 20 percent........................... 2.2 1.5 1.2 1.3 2.3 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.8 1.8

21 to 50 percent......................... 1.6 1.1 1.1 1.1 2.2 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.6

More than 50 percent................ 2.2 1.4 1.2 1.4 2.2 1.2 1.4 1.9 1.5 1.6

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 1.9 1.0 1.2 1.1 2.1 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.7

15 to 32 percent......................... 2.2 1.7 1.2 1.3 2.0 1.5 1.8 1.3 1.3 1.6

33 to 59 percent......................... 1.8 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.4 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.6

60 percent or more .................... 1.6 1.3 1.2 1.3 2.1 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.8

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................. 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.1 1.5

Math/science ............................. 1.4 0.9 0.7 0.9 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.3 1.5 1.4

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 1.4 0.8 0.5 0.7 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 2.0 1.2 1.2 1.2 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.0 1.5 1.7

4 to 9 years................................ 2.1 1.3 1.4 1.2 2.5 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.3

10 to 19 years............................ 1.6 1.4 1.1 1.2 2.3 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.9

20 or more years........................ 1.7 1.2 0.8 1.0 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic................. 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.7 1.0

Black, non-Hispanic ................. 3.8 2.4 2.0 2.4 4.4 2.6 2.2 3.1 2.9 3.8

Other.......................................... 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.9 3.8 2.5 3.7 2.9 3.5 3.1

Sex

Male ........................................... 1.7 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.5

Female ....................................... 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.8 1.1 0.9 1.1 1.1 0.9 1.1
B-43

Table B-11a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated with various

frequency in the last 12 months in various activities related to teaching, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship

Frequency of activity Frequency of activity School and teacher

characteristic

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

All targeted public school

teachers1

........................... 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.6

School instructional level

Elementary school..................... 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.6 1.3 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.0

Middle school............................ 1.6 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.8 1.6 0.9 0.6 0.8 1.1

High school ............................... 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.5 0.6 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.8

Combined .................................. 3.0 2.2 1.3 1.0 1.6 3.6 1.9 1.6 2.0 1.9

School enrollment size

Less than 300 ............................ 1.9 1.6 0.7 0.7 1.4 2.8 2.3 0.4 1.1 1.7

300 to 499.................................. 1.5 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.9 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.4

500 to 999.................................. 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.5 1.4 0.9 0.6 0.7 1.0

1,000 or more ............................ 1.1 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.6 1.5 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.1

Locale

Central city ................................ 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.6 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.2

Urban fringe/large town ........... 1.1 1.1 0.3 0.5 0.6 1.4 1.0 0.6 0.8 1.1

Rural/small town....................... 1.1 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.7 1.6 1.0 0.5 0.7 1.2

Region

Northeast ................................... 1.3 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.6 2.2 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.4

Midwest..................................... 1.0 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.5 1.6 0.9 0.6 0.6 1.3

South.......................................... 1.3 1.0 0.4 0.7 0.8 1.4 1.1 0.5 0.7 1.0

West ........................................... 1.8 1.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.8 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.5

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 1.3 1.1 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.7 1.1

6 to 20 percent........................... 1.2 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.6 1.6 0.9 0.6 0.8 1.2

21 to 50 percent......................... 1.4 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.6 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.1

More than 50 percent................ 1.7 1.5 0.6 1.1 0.9 2.1 1.5 0.7 0.9 1.6

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 1.2 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.6 1.4 0.9 0.7 0.8 1.2

15 to 32 percent......................... 1.2 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.9 1.2

33 to 59 percent......................... 1.7 1.0 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.9 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.5

60 percent or more .................... 1.7 1.4 0.6 0.9 0.9 2.0 1.7 0.6 0.8 1.5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................. 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.5 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.7 1.0

Math/science ............................. 1.4 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.5 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.0

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.2 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 1.8 1.7 0.9 1.4 1.5 1.3 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.5

4 to 9 years................................ 1.7 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.7 2.0 1.6 0.6 1.0 1.5

10 to 19 years............................ 1.4 1.1 0.5 0.4 0.7 1.8 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.4

20 or more years........................ 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.2 0.9 0.5 0.7 1.0

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic................. 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.7

Black, non-Hispanic ................. 4.1 2.3 1.2 1.9 2.9 4.1 2.4 2.2 1.6 4.2

Other.......................................... 3.1 2.1 1.1 1.5 2.0 3.4 1.9 1.7 1.6 2.1

Sex

Male ........................................... 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.8

Female ....................................... 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.7
B-44

Table B-11a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated with various

frequency in the last 12 months in various activities related to teaching, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Networking with teachers outside your school Individual or collaborative research on a

topic of interest to you professionally

School and teacher Frequency of activity Frequency of activity

characteristic

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

Never

A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 0.9 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.5

School instructional level

Elementary school..................... 1.4 1.7 1.1 0.8 0.7 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.0 0.9

Middle school............................ 1.8 2.0 1.2 0.9 0.6 1.8 1.7 0.9 0.9 1.1

High school ............................... 1.5 1.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.8 1.0

Combined .................................. 3.9 3.2 3.0 1.5 1.7 3.6 3.0 2.8 1.7 2.6

School enrollment size

Less than 300 ............................ 3.6 3.4 1.7 1.4 1.2 3.2 2.6 1.8 1.9 2.0

300 to 499.................................. 2.3 2.2 1.4 0.9 1.0 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.2

500 to 999.................................. 1.1 1.4 0.8 0.8 0.7 1.6 1.6 0.9 0.8 0.9

1,000 or more ............................ 1.9 1.9 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.6 1.3 0.9 1.1 1.1

Locale

Central city ................................ 1.6 2.0 1.1 1.0 0.8 2.0 1.8 0.9 1.1 1.0

Urban fringe/large town ........... 1.4 1.5 1.1 0.9 0.7 1.6 1.3 0.8 1.0 0.9

Rural/small town....................... 1.6 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.7 1.6 1.6 1.0 1.0 0.9

Region

Northeast ................................... 2.3 1.9 1.2 1.3 1.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.4 1.5

Midwest..................................... 1.8 1.9 1.3 1.0 0.9 1.9 1.7 1.1 1.2 1.2

South.......................................... 1.6 1.6 0.8 0.7 0.6 1.5 1.7 1.0 0.9 0.9

West ........................................... 2.3 2.5 1.6 1.0 1.2 2.1 1.8 1.4 1.8 1.4

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 1.9 1.9 1.1 0.8 0.8 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.0 1.0

6 to 20 percent........................... 1.8 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.7 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.0 1.3

21 to 50 percent......................... 1.7 1.8 1.1 1.3 0.9 1.7 1.9 1.2 1.2 1.1

More than 50 percent................ 1.7 2.0 1.2 1.0 1.0 2.3 1.8 1.2 1.3 0.9

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 1.7 2.4 1.3 1.3 1.0 1.8 1.4 1.0 1.0 1.4

15 to 32 percent......................... 1.8 1.9 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.9 1.5 1.2 1.1 1.0

33 to 59 percent......................... 2.1 1.9 1.1 1.0 0.9 2.1 1.8 0.9 1.4 1.1

60 percent or more .................... 1.9 2.1 1.2 1.0 0.9 2.1 1.8 1.2 1.2 0.9

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2.................. 1.4 1.8 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.0 0.9

Math/science ............................. 1.6 1.7 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.9 1.4 0.9 0.7 1.0

Other targeted academic

subject ................................... 1.6 1.8 0.8 0.7 0.6 1.4 1.3 0.8 0.9 0.9

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 1.6 1.7 1.3 1.0 1.4 1.8 1.7 1.2 1.0 1.1

4 to 9 years................................ 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.1 1.3 1.3

10 to 19 years............................ 1.8 1.9 0.9 1.1 0.8 1.9 1.8 1.2 1.3 1.4

20 or more years........................ 1.4 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.9 0.8

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic................. 0.9 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.6 0.7 0.6

Black, non-Hispanic ................. 3.9 4.0 2.6 2.0 2.2 3.5 3.5 3.0 1.9 1.7

Other.......................................... 3.7 3.4 2.4 2.1 2.3 3.7 3.5 2.2 2.3 2.4

Sex

Male ........................................... 1.7 1.4 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.8 1.4 0.8 0.9 1.1

Female ....................................... 1.0 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.6

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in English/language arts, social

studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional level.

Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional Development and

Training, 1998.
B-45

Table B-12.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities

related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they believe

the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

Common planning period for team teachers

Regularly scheduled collaboration with

other teachers, excluding meetings held

for administrative purposes

Improved my teaching Improved my teaching School and teacher characteristic

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 40 33 23 4 29 35 31 5

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 40 33 24 4 32 36 27 4

Middle school................................... 46 33 18 4 29 37 30 4

High school....................................... 30 35 27 7 23 32 39 7

Combined ......................................... 33 27 33 7 18 27 49 6

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 35 37 24 4 25 34 33 7

300 to 499......................................... 43 33 20 3 33 33 31 3

500 to 999......................................... 40 33 23 4 29 37 29 5

1,000 or more ................................... 38 31 24 6 27 33 34 6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 38 32 26 4 32 35 28 6

Urban fringe/large town................... 42 31 22 5 30 34 32 4

Rural/small town.............................. 39 37 20 4 25 36 35 4

Region

Northeast........................................... 38 36 23 4 32 34 30 4

Midwest ............................................ 40 33 23 4 25 32 36 6

South................................................. 41 31 23 4 29 37 29 4

West .................................................. 41 33 21 4 31 34 30 5

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 39 34 24 3 27 31 36 6

6 to 20 percent.................................. 44 32 20 4 33 34 30 3

21 to 50 percent................................ 42 35 19 4 27 39 29 4

More than 50 percent....................... 36 30 27 6 29 36 29 6

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 45 30 22 3 33 32 30 5

15 to 32 percent................................ 40 35 22 4 28 34 34 4

33 to 59 percent................................ 39 33 23 4 24 36 34 5

60 percent or more ........................... 37 34 24 5 32 37 26 5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 41 32 23 3 33 36 27 4

Math/science..................................... 35 37 23 5 22 33 38 7

Other targeted academic subject ..... 41 31 22 6 27 34 34 6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 46 28 23 4 32 35 28 4

4 to 9 years ....................................... 41 35 21 4 34 32 31 4

10 to 19 years................................... 41 33 22 4 28 37 29 6

20 or more years............................... 37 34 24 5 26 35 34 5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 40 33 23 4 28 35 32 5

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 41 32 24 3 33 37 26 4

Other ................................................. 46 27 21 7 36 30 31 3

Sex

Male .................................................. 30 34 29 6 20 33 40 7

Female............................................... 43 32 21 4 32 36 28 4
B-46

Table B-12.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities

related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they believe

the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Being mentored by another teacher

in a formal relationship Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 34 27 32 7 19 30 39 11

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 37 24 32 7 23 31 37 9

Middle school................................... 32 28 33 6 18 30 42 10

High school....................................... 31 32 29 8 14 31 38 16

Combined ......................................... 27 28 36 8 11 25 52 12

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 31 30 36 3 12 25 55 8

300 to 499......................................... 42 21 29 7 26 30 35 9

500 to 999......................................... 31 28 34 7 20 30 39 11

1,000 or more ................................... 36 27 28 9 15 33 38 15

Locale

Central city ....................................... 36 28 30 7 20 36 32 12

Urban fringe/large town................... 37 23 30 9 19 31 40 10

Rural/small town.............................. 29 29 35 6 20 22 47 11

Region

Northeast........................................... 31 39 22 8 19 32 39 9

Midwest ............................................ 33 24 38 4 21 30 41 8

South................................................. 35 26 33 6 17 31 38 14

West .................................................. 35 23 32 11 22 29 40 9

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 30 31 36 3 17 27 43 13

6 to 20 percent.................................. 44 22 27 7 25 32 34 8

21 to 50 percent................................ 28 31 32 8 19 28 40 13

More than 50 percent....................... 37 23 31 9 16 34 39 11

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 38 27 30 5 23 25 41 11

15 to 32 percent................................ 29 30 37 4 19 33 36 12

33 to 59 percent................................ 30 28 33 9 17 31 42 11

60 percent or more ........................... 38 24 29 9 19 32 38 11

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 36 25 31 8 23 31 37 9

Math/science..................................... 30 29 38 4 15 27 46 13

Other targeted academic subject ..... 35 28 28 9 16 31 40 14

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 45 26 25 5 19 35 41 6

4 to 9 years ....................................... 31 26 36 8 18 29 42 11

10 to 19 years................................... 32 28 35 5 18 35 33 14

20 or more years............................... 18 27 39 15 21 27 42 10

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 31 27 35 7 17 31 40 11

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 50 23 21 6 31 24 35 10

Other ................................................. 41 24 24 11 25 28 36 12

Sex

Male .................................................. 29 31 31 9 18 29 42 10

Female............................................... 37 25 32 7 20 31 39 11
B-47

Table B-12.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities

related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which they believe

the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Networking with teachers outside your school Individual or collaborative research on a topic

of interest to you professionally

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 23 33 41 4 34 35 29 2

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 25 32 40 3 35 35 29 1

Middle school................................... 22 32 43 3 34 33 31 2

High school....................................... 19 35 42 5 34 37 27 2

Combined ......................................... 20 38 37 5 29 47 22 2

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 26 27 46 2 30 43 26 1

300 to 499......................................... 24 32 39 5 40 34 25 1

500 to 999......................................... 23 33 41 3 32 34 32 1

1,000 or more ................................... 21 35 39 5 35 35 27 2

Locale

Central city ....................................... 25 32 38 4 36 34 28 2

Urban fringe/large town................... 20 35 41 4 35 35 29 1

Rural/small town.............................. 24 31 43 2 32 37 29 2

Region

Northeast........................................... 22 36 40 2 37 36 26 1

Midwest ............................................ 26 32 39 4 32 40 27 *

South................................................. 21 32 42 4 34 32 32 2

West .................................................. 23 32 40 5 36 34 28 2

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 25 29 42 4 31 42 27 1

6 to 20 percent.................................. 20 34 43 3 36 33 31 1

21 to 50 percent................................ 21 31 44 4 35 34 28 2

More than 50 percent....................... 26 35 34 4 37 32 29 2

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 22 30 42 5 38 34 27 1

15 to 32 percent................................ 21 36 40 3 32 39 27 1

33 to 59 percent................................ 22 33 43 2 33 37 29 1

60 percent or more ........................... 25 33 38 4 35 31 32 2

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 25 32 39 4 35 35 29 1

Math/science..................................... 21 32 45 3 31 35 33 *

Other targeted academic subject ..... 20 35 41 4 36 36 26 3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 27 37 33 3 32 34 31 2

4 to 9 years ....................................... 25 32 41 2 31 36 31 1

10 to 19 years................................... 21 32 42 4 40 32 26 2

20 or more years............................... 21 32 43 5 34 37 28 1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 22 33 42 3 33 36 29 2

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 33 27 37 4 46 24 29 1

Other ................................................. 29 34 31 7 37 35 27 *

Sex

Male .................................................. 22 31 42 5 31 36 32 2

Female............................................... 23 33 40 3 36 35 28 2

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each type of professional development program, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-48

Table B-12a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in various activities related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998

Common planning period for team teachers

Regularly scheduled collaboration with

other teachers, excluding meetings held

for administrative purposes

Improved my teaching Improved my teaching School and teacher characteristic

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 1.5 1.1 1.1 0.5 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.5

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 2.2 1.6 1.5 0.7 1.6 1.5 1.1 0.7

Middle school................................... 1.9 1.9 1.5 0.7 1.8 1.6 1.7 0.9

High school....................................... 2.3 2.3 2.2 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.0

Combined ......................................... 10.4 6.0 7.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 4.4 2.1

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 4.2 4.7 3.9 1.5 3.3 3.6 3.2 2.1

300 to 499......................................... 2.9 2.6 2.5 0.9 2.7 2.6 1.9 0.7

500 to 999......................................... 2.1 1.7 1.6 0.7 1.5 1.6 1.4 0.7

1,000 or more ................................... 2.6 2.2 2.2 1.4 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.0

Locale

Central city ....................................... 2.1 1.6 1.7 0.9 1.8 1.7 1.5 0.9

Urban fringe/large town................... 2.4 1.9 1.8 0.7 1.7 1.7 1.6 0.7

Rural/small town.............................. 2.1 2.1 1.6 0.9 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.0

Region

Northeast........................................... 3.0 3.2 2.5 1.0 2.4 2.5 2.3 0.9

Midwest ............................................ 2.8 2.3 2.2 0.8 1.9 1.8 2.1 1.1

South................................................. 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.6 1.4 0.8

West .................................................. 3.3 3.2 2.2 1.3 2.4 2.2 1.6 1.0

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 2.5 2.4 2.1 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.2 1.1

6 to 20 percent.................................. 3.2 2.4 2.0 1.0 2.1 1.9 1.6 0.7

21 to 50 percent................................ 2.7 2.6 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.1 1.7 0.9

More than 50 percent....................... 2.3 2.1 1.9 1.3 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.1

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 2.4 2.3 1.7 0.7 2.0 2.0 1.6 0.9

15 to 32 percent................................ 3.1 2.3 2.3 0.8 1.9 1.8 1.7 0.7

33 to 59 percent................................ 3.0 2.7 2.0 1.1 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.0

60 percent or more ........................... 2.2 2.3 2.0 1.1 2.1 2.0 1.7 1.0

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 2.3 1.9 1.5 0.7 1.6 1.4 1.3 0.6

Math/science..................................... 2.2 2.4 2.0 0.9 1.7 1.8 2.0 1.0

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.8 2.1 1.4 0.9 1.7 1.8 1.5 0.8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.8 2.7 2.5 1.1 2.2 1.9 2.1 0.8

4 to 9 years ....................................... 2.5 2.3 2.0 1.2 2.2 2.1 2.3 1.1

10 to 19 years................................... 3.3 2.2 2.4 0.9 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.2

20 or more years............................... 2.3 2.0 1.5 0.8 1.8 2.1 1.5 0.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.6 1.2 1.2 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.6

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 4.6 4.3 4.0 1.3 4.5 3.3 3.4 1.7

Other ................................................. 4.5 3.9 4.1 2.6 5.0 4.0 3.8 1.7

Sex

Male .................................................. 2.2 2.3 2.3 1.2 1.5 1.9 1.8 1.0

Female............................................... 1.8 1.2 1.2 0.6 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.6
B-49

Table B-12a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in various activities related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Being mentored by another teacher

in a formal relationship Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 1.8 1.7 2.0 1.1 1.6 2.1 1.9 1.1

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 2.7 2.4 3.0 1.8 2.6 3.3 3.1 1.8

Middle school................................... 3.4 3.5 3.2 1.5 2.7 3.4 3.3 2.5

High school....................................... 2.5 3.2 3.0 1.7 2.1 2.7 3.5 1.9

Combined ......................................... 6.6 8.8 8.5 4.4 4.9 6.1 5.5 4.5

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 6.5 6.5 7.6 2.8 4.5 6.3 7.6 3.8

300 to 499......................................... 4.4 4.1 4.4 2.4 4.3 5.5 4.7 2.8

500 to 999......................................... 2.7 2.5 2.8 1.5 1.9 2.9 2.7 1.6

1,000 or more ................................... 2.7 2.9 3.0 2.0 2.4 3.1 3.7 2.1

Locale

Central city ....................................... 3.0 2.3 2.8 1.7 2.9 3.7 3.2 2.0

Urban fringe/large town................... 3.6 2.5 3.8 2.4 2.2 3.5 3.4 1.5

Rural/small town.............................. 3.4 3.3 3.7 2.2 3.6 2.7 3.4 1.9

Region

Northeast........................................... 4.3 5.4 5.1 2.5 3.6 5.0 4.7 2.9

Midwest ............................................ 5.8 5.2 5.1 1.5 4.0 4.7 4.5 2.1

South................................................. 2.8 2.3 2.6 1.5 2.1 2.9 2.5 2.0

West .................................................. 4.1 4.2 3.9 3.1 4.1 4.8 5.0 2.1

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 3.6 3.6 4.0 1.5 2.9 3.8 3.6 3.2

6 to 20 percent.................................. 3.7 3.9 3.9 2.3 3.3 3.9 4.3 2.0

21 to 50 percent................................ 3.2 3.3 4.5 2.4 2.8 3.4 3.0 2.5

More than 50 percent....................... 3.7 3.0 3.4 2.2 3.1 4.3 3.6 2.2

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 4.1 3.9 4.3 1.9 2.6 4.0 3.5 2.0

15 to 32 percent................................ 4.1 4.1 3.9 1.2 3.4 3.8 4.0 1.9

33 to 59 percent................................ 3.3 3.7 3.7 2.7 2.9 3.9 3.3 2.2

60 percent or more ........................... 3.7 3.0 3.3 2.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 2.2

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 2.5 2.5 2.8 1.8 2.6 3.3 3.0 1.8

Math/science..................................... 3.7 3.6 3.8 1.2 2.2 3.2 3.1 2.2

Other targeted academic subject ..... 2.9 2.7 3.4 1.7 1.9 2.9 3.2 1.7

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.4 1.9 2.2 1.0 4.0 5.8 5.4 2.6

4 to 9 years ....................................... 4.4 3.6 4.6 1.8 3.6 3.7 3.6 2.4

10 to 19 years................................... 4.5 4.8 5.0 2.8 2.8 3.6 3.2 2.4

20 or more years............................... 4.3 5.2 5.1 4.3 2.1 3.3 3.4 1.6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.7 1.8 2.2 1.1 1.7 2.3 2.1 1.2

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 6.1 5.2 4.3 2.9 5.1 5.5 6.0 3.9

Other ................................................. 6.0 5.2 6.2 5.5 6.9 6.9 7.5 3.8

Sex

Male .................................................. 2.7 2.6 3.2 1.5 3.1 3.4 3.5 2.1

Female............................................... 2.2 1.9 2.3 1.5 2.0 2.6 2.0 1.3
B-50

Table B-12a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in various activities related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their classroom teaching, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Networking with teachers outside your school Individual or collaborative research on a topic

of interest to you professionally

School and teacher characteristic Improved my teaching Improved my teaching

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

A

lot

ModeratelySomewhatNot

at all

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 1.2 1.0 1.2 0.4 1.2 1.1 1.2 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.7 1.7 2.0 0.7 1.9 1.7 2.0 0.4

Middle school................................... 1.7 1.7 1.9 0.7 2.3 2.2 2.5 0.6

High school....................................... 1.6 2.0 2.5 0.8 2.2 2.2 2.1 0.5

Combined ......................................... 4.3 4.4 4.5 2.3 6.0 5.2 4.0 1.3

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 3.7 4.1 4.9 1.0 3.7 4.2 3.3 1.1

300 to 499......................................... 2.4 2.3 2.8 1.2 2.9 2.4 3.2 0.6

500 to 999......................................... 1.7 1.7 1.9 0.6 1.8 1.8 1.7 0.4

1,000 or more ................................... 1.6 1.9 2.1 0.8 2.3 2.3 2.3 0.6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.9 2.2 2.1 0.9 2.3 1.9 2.2 0.5

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.6 1.8 2.0 0.8 1.7 1.8 2.0 0.3

Rural/small town.............................. 2.2 2.1 2.3 0.6 2.2 2.3 2.2 0.6

Region

Northeast........................................... 1.9 2.4 2.5 0.6 2.4 2.7 2.1 0.3

Midwest ............................................ 2.7 2.4 2.6 0.9 2.2 2.8 2.4 0.3

South................................................. 1.9 2.0 2.1 0.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 0.6

West .................................................. 2.3 2.6 3.0 1.1 2.9 2.5 2.9 0.7

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 2.2 2.1 2.6 0.9 2.2 2.5 2.3 0.3

6 to 20 percent.................................. 2.1 2.2 2.5 0.8 2.8 2.4 2.3 0.4

21 to 50 percent................................ 2.1 2.1 2.2 0.9 2.5 2.6 2.2 0.8

More than 50 percent....................... 2.3 2.2 2.4 0.9 2.7 2.6 2.6 0.7

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 2.0 2.2 2.2 1.2 2.2 2.4 2.2 0.4

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.9 2.1 2.4 0.9 2.5 2.6 2.3 0.4

33 to 59 percent................................ 2.5 2.1 2.2 0.8 2.3 2.3 2.3 0.7

60 percent or more ........................... 2.4 2.1 2.2 0.9 2.5 2.1 2.5 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.7 1.8 2.1 0.7 2.1 1.7 2.0 0.4

Math/science..................................... 2.0 1.8 2.1 0.8 2.4 2.7 2.7 0.3

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.5 1.5 2.1 0.8 1.9 1.8 1.8 0.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.3 2.4 2.5 0.9 2.7 2.5 2.5 0.7

4 to 9 years ....................................... 2.5 2.3 2.6 0.6 2.3 2.5 2.2 0.6

10 to 19 years................................... 2.4 2.3 2.6 1.0 2.5 2.7 2.5 0.7

20 or more years............................... 1.7 1.9 2.4 1.0 2.3 2.2 1.8 0.5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.5 1.2 1.2 1.3 0.3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 5.2 3.9 5.2 1.6 5.6 4.1 4.3 0.9

Other ................................................. 3.7 4.3 4.2 2.6 4.6 5.1 4.6 0.4

Sex

Male .................................................. 2.1 2.1 2.4 1.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 0.5

Female............................................... 1.4 1.2 1.5 0.5 1.4 1.3 1.4 0.3

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-51

Table B-13.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program when they first began teaching, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic Participated in induction program

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 34

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 33

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 36

High school.......................................................................................................................... 34

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 32

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 27

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 31

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 35

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 39

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 37

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 37

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 27

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 29

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 26

South.................................................................................................................................... 38

West ..................................................................................................................................... 39

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 25

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 34

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 37

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 39

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 35

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 32

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 32

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 37

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 33

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 35

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 35

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 65

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 55

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 28

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 14

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 32

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 48

Other .................................................................................................................................... 45

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 39

Female.................................................................................................................................. 32

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-52

Table B-13a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in a formal induction program when they first began teaching, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic Participated in induction program

All targeted public school teachers`1............................................................................. 0.8

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 1.4

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 1.8

High school.......................................................................................................................... 1.5

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 3.5

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 2.7

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 2.0

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 1.5

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 2.0

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 1.6

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 1.6

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 1.4

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 2.1

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 1.4

South.................................................................................................................................... 1.3

West ..................................................................................................................................... 2.5

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 1.2

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 2.0

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 2.0

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 1.9

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 1.8

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 1.9

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 1.8

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 1.6

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 1.3

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 1.6

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 1.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 1.9

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 2.1

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 1.7

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 1.1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 0.9

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 3.4

Other .................................................................................................................................... 3.9

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 1.6

Female.................................................................................................................................. 0.9

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-53

Table B-14.—Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

Teaching assignment

School and teacher characteristic General Departmentalized settings

elementary

classroom1 Total2 Main Secondary

All targeted public school teachers3......................... 23 24 24 24

School instructional level

Elementary school.......................................................... 23 # # #

Middle school................................................................. # 25 25 25

High school..................................................................... # 24 24 23

Combined ....................................................................... # 22 22 21

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................................................. 20 19 19 18

300 to 499....................................................................... 22 22 22 22

500 to 999....................................................................... 23 24 24 24

1,000 or more ................................................................. 26 26 26 27

Locale

Central city ..................................................................... 23 25 25 24

Urban fringe/large town................................................. 23 25 25 25

Rural/small town............................................................ 21 22 22 22

Region

Northeast......................................................................... 23 23 23 23

Midwest .......................................................................... 22 23 23 23

South............................................................................... 22 23 23 23

West ................................................................................ 23 28 28 26

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less.............................................................. 22 23 23 23

6 to 20 percent................................................................ 23 24 24 26

21 to 50 percent.............................................................. 23 24 24 23

More than 50 percent..................................................... 23 25 25 23

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ...................................................... 23 24 24 24

15 to 32 percent.............................................................. 22 24 24 25

33 to 59 percent.............................................................. 22 24 24 23

60 percent or more ......................................................... 23 24 24 22

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.............................................................. 22 24 24 23

4 to 9 years ..................................................................... 23 24 24 25

10 to 19 years................................................................. 23 24 24 23

20 or more years............................................................. 23 24 24 23

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ...................................................... 23 24 24 24

Black, non-Hispanic....................................................... 23 25 25 *

Other ............................................................................... 23 24 25 22

Sex

Male ................................................................................ 24 25 24 25

Female............................................................................. 22 23 24 23

#Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only; data for departmentalized settings are not reported for

elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

*Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of

instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

2Total includes class size information for main, secondary, and other teacher assignments. Data for other teaching assignments are not shown

separately because few teachers in this study reported other teaching assignments.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-54

Table B-14a.—Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in

general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998

Teaching assignment

School and teacher characteristic General Departmentalized settings

elementary

classrooms1 Total2 Main Secondary

All targeted public school teachers3......................... 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4

School instructional level

Elementary school.......................................................... 0.1 # # #

Middle school................................................................. # 0.2 0.2 0.5

High school..................................................................... # 0.2 0.2 1.1

Combined ....................................................................... # 0.6 0.6 1.9

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................................................. 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0

300 to 499....................................................................... 0.2 0.5 0.5 1.0

500 to 999....................................................................... 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5

1,000 or more ................................................................. 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.9

Locale

Central city ..................................................................... 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.9

Urban fringe/large town................................................. 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.9

Rural/small town............................................................ 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.6

Region

Northeast......................................................................... 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.2

Midwest .......................................................................... 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6

South............................................................................... 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.7

West ................................................................................ 0.3 0.4 0.4 1.2

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less.............................................................. 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.7

6 to 20 percent................................................................ 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.7

21 to 50 percent.............................................................. 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.0

More than 50 percent..................................................... 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ...................................................... 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.8

15 to 32 percent.............................................................. 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.0

33 to 59 percent.............................................................. 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.7

60 percent or more ......................................................... 0.3 0.4 0.4 1.0

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.............................................................. 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.9

4 to 9 years ..................................................................... 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.9

10 to 19 years................................................................. 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.0

20 or more years............................................................. 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ...................................................... 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5

Black, non-Hispanic....................................................... 0.5 0.6 0.6 *

Other ............................................................................... 0.6 0.7 0.7 1.9

Sex

Male ................................................................................ 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.0

Female............................................................................. 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5

#Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only; data for departmentalized settings are not reported for

elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

*Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of

instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

2Total includes class size information for main, secondary, and other teacher assignments. Data for other teaching assignments are not shown

separately because few teachers in this study reported other teaching assignments.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-55

Table B-15.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998

Parents support me in my efforts

to educate their children

The school administration

supports me in my work

School and teacher characteristic Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 32 54 11 3 55 36 7 2

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 36 52 9 3 56 36 6 2

Middle school................................... 30 56 11 2 59 33 7 1

High school....................................... 24 58 14 4 49 39 9 3

Combined ......................................... 25 59 13 2 48 42 6 4

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 36 54 9 1 57 37 5 1

300 to 499......................................... 34 56 8 2 54 38 6 3

500 to 999......................................... 32 53 11 3 57 35 7 2

1,000 or more ................................... 26 56 13 4 50 37 9 3

Locale

Central city ....................................... 31 50 14 6 53 36 8 4

Urban fringe/large town................... 33 55 9 2 55 36 8 2

Rural/small town.............................. 30 58 10 2 56 37 6 1

Region

Northeast........................................... 34 55 8 3 46 43 9 2

Midwest ............................................ 34 54 10 1 52 39 7 2

South................................................. 28 56 12 5 60 32 6 2

West .................................................. 34 52 12 2 55 34 8 3

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 33 58 8 1 50 42 7 1

6 to 20 percent.................................. 39 53 7 1 57 33 8 2

21 to 50 percent................................ 31 55 11 3 61 32 6 2

More than 50 percent....................... 24 51 18 8 51 37 8 4

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 41 53 5 1 56 34 8 2

15 to 32 percent................................ 34 56 9 1 53 38 8 1

33 to 59 percent................................ 29 57 11 3 55 36 6 3

60 percent or more ........................... 23 53 17 7 54 36 7 3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 37 51 9 3 56 35 7 2

Math/science..................................... 28 57 12 4 53 39 6 2

Other targeted academic subject ..... 25 58 14 3 54 35 8 3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 26 55 14 5 60 32 7 2

4 to 9 years ....................................... 32 55 11 2 56 34 7 2

10 to 19 years................................... 32 54 10 3 53 38 6 3

20 or more years............................... 33 54 10 3 52 38 8 2

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 31 56 11 3 54 36 7 2

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 36 47 13 4 58 35 4 2

Other ................................................. 42 43 12 3 59 33 7 1

Sex

Male .................................................. 31 52 13 4 51 38 8 3

Female............................................... 32 55 10 3 56 35 7 2
B-56

Table B-15.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Other teachers share ideas that

are helpful to me in my teaching Goals and priorities for the school are clear

School and teacher characteristic Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 63 33 4 1 47 38 11 4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 69 28 2 1 52 36 9 3

Middle school................................... 60 36 3 1 48 39 11 3

High school....................................... 53 40 7 1 37 42 16 5

Combined ......................................... 49 43 5 3 32 41 17 9

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 61 35 2 2 45 40 9 6

300 to 499......................................... 65 31 4 1 48 37 12 3

500 to 999......................................... 65 32 3 1 49 37 10 4

1,000 or more ................................... 58 36 6 1 42 40 14 4

Locale

Central city ....................................... 64 31 4 1 48 37 10 5

Urban fringe/large town................... 64 32 4 1 47 37 12 4

Rural/small town.............................. 60 36 3 1 46 40 11 3

Region

Northeast........................................... 61 36 2 1 42 40 14 5

Midwest ............................................ 61 34 4 1 39 43 13 4

South................................................. 62 33 4 1 56 34 7 3

West .................................................. 68 27 5 1 44 38 13 5

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 59 37 3 1 40 44 12 4

6 to 20 percent.................................. 66 29 4 1 48 37 12 3

21 to 50 percent................................ 64 31 4 1 54 36 8 3

More than 50 percent....................... 61 34 4 1 46 36 12 6

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 63 33 3 1 44 39 12 4

15 to 32 percent................................ 62 34 3 1 47 39 11 4

33 to 59 percent................................ 62 32 5 1 48 39 11 2

60 percent or more ........................... 63 33 3 1 50 35 11 5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 70 27 2 1 52 36 9 3

Math/science..................................... 55 40 4 1 41 41 14 4

Other targeted academic subject ..... 56 38 5 1 43 39 13 5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 67 28 4 1 46 39 10 5

4 to 9 years ....................................... 66 29 5 1 46 39 11 4

10 to 19 years................................... 62 33 4 1 48 37 11 4

20 or more years............................... 60 36 3 1 48 38 11 3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 62 33 4 1 45 39 11 4

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 63 34 2 1 61 29 7 2

Other ................................................. 67 30 3 1 52 32 11 4

Sex

Male .................................................. 52 41 5 2 37 43 15 5

Female............................................... 66 30 3 1 50 36 10 4

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each statement, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-57

Table B-15a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or

disagreeing with selected statements about parent and school support for teachers,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998

Parents support me in my efforts

to educate their children

The school administration

supports me in my work

School and teacher characteristic Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 1.1 1.1 0.6 0.3 1.1 1.0 0.5 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.7 1.7 0.8 0.5 1.9 1.7 0.8 0.4

Middle school................................... 1.6 1.7 1.1 0.5 1.6 1.7 0.9 0.4

High school....................................... 1.4 1.7 1.0 0.7 1.7 1.6 0.9 0.4

Combined ......................................... 3.3 4.1 2.3 0.9 3.8 3.2 2.9 1.8

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.8 3.2 1.7 0.7 3.2 2.5 2.0 0.6

300 to 499......................................... 2.0 1.9 1.2 0.6 2.8 2.6 1.2 0.8

500 to 999......................................... 1.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.7 1.4 0.8 0.3

1,000 or more ................................... 1.2 1.7 1.1 0.7 1.7 1.7 0.9 0.5

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.8 1.7 1.2 0.8 2.0 1.9 0.9 0.6

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.4 1.7 0.8 0.4 1.6 1.6 0.8 0.3

Rural/small town.............................. 1.5 1.7 0.9 0.4 1.8 1.6 0.9 0.4

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.4 2.4 1.0 0.8 2.6 2.1 1.4 0.5

Midwest ............................................ 1.9 2.1 1.3 0.5 2.1 1.8 1.0 0.4

South................................................. 1.6 1.6 0.9 0.7 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.5

West .................................................. 2.4 2.6 1.5 0.7 2.4 1.9 1.3 0.9

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 2.0 1.8 0.9 0.3 2.0 1.8 1.2 0.4

6 to 20 percent.................................. 2.0 1.8 1.1 0.4 2.0 1.7 1.1 0.5

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.9 2.2 1.3 0.7 2.0 1.9 0.9 0.5

More than 50 percent....................... 1.7 1.9 1.7 1.0 1.8 1.5 1.0 0.7

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.9 2.0 0.5 0.4 2.6 2.2 1.2 0.5

15 to 32 percent................................ 2.0 1.8 1.0 0.4 1.7 1.9 1.1 0.4

33 to 59 percent................................ 2.2 2.1 1.2 0.8 2.2 1.9 1.2 0.6

60 percent or more ........................... 1.8 2.2 1.7 0.9 1.9 1.9 0.8 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.8 1.8 0.8 0.5 1.9 1.6 0.9 0.4

Math/science..................................... 1.5 1.6 1.2 0.7 1.5 1.6 0.7 0.5

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.2 1.7 1.1 0.6 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.7 1.8 1.3 0.9 2.6 2.1 1.5 0.4

4 to 9 years ....................................... 2.1 2.1 1.2 0.7 2.0 1.7 1.1 0.6

10 to 19 years................................... 2.0 2.1 1.3 0.6 2.1 1.9 1.0 0.6

20 or more years............................... 1.6 1.7 1.0 0.6 1.4 1.6 0.8 0.6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.4 1.2 1.1 0.5 0.3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.8 3.8 2.3 1.5 4.0 3.7 1.3 1.2

Other ................................................. 3.5 3.7 2.5 1.0 3.6 3.5 1.7 0.7

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.9 2.0 1.3 0.6 1.9 1.7 0.9 0.6

Female............................................... 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.4 1.4 1.3 0.6 0.3
B-58

Table B-15a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or

disagreeing with selected statements about parent and school support for teachers,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Other teachers share ideas that

are helpful to me in my teaching Goals and priorities for the school are clear

School and teacher characteristic Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.1 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.5 1.5 0.4 0.2 1.7 1.7 1.0 0.7

Middle school................................... 1.8 1.7 0.6 0.3 1.5 1.5 1.1 0.6

High school....................................... 1.5 1.4 0.7 0.3 1.6 1.5 1.3 0.7

Combined ......................................... 3.8 3.1 1.5 1.2 3.6 3.6 2.8 2.6

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.9 2.9 0.8 0.7 3.3 2.7 1.5 1.5

300 to 499......................................... 2.2 2.3 0.7 0.3 2.7 2.2 1.6 0.8

500 to 999......................................... 1.2 1.3 0.4 0.2 1.4 1.4 0.8 0.6

1,000 or more ................................... 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.3 1.7 1.7 1.1 0.6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.8 1.6 0.6 0.3 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.7

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.4 1.4 0.4 0.3 1.5 1.4 1.1 0.6

Rural/small town.............................. 1.9 1.9 0.4 0.2 1.7 1.6 1.2 0.6

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.0 1.9 0.6 0.5 2.9 2.7 1.6 1.1

Midwest ............................................ 2.2 2.1 0.6 0.3 2.2 2.1 1.5 1.0

South................................................. 1.5 1.4 0.6 0.3 1.2 1.4 0.8 0.5

West .................................................. 2.4 2.1 0.7 0.3 3.0 2.3 1.6 0.9

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 2.1 2.2 0.5 0.4 2.0 1.9 1.3 0.9

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.7 1.7 0.6 0.3 2.1 1.7 1.3 0.8

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.7 1.8 0.6 0.3 1.9 1.8 0.9 0.6

More than 50 percent....................... 1.8 1.6 0.7 0.3 2.2 1.8 1.1 0.8

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 2.0 1.9 0.5 0.3 2.2 1.8 1.3 0.8

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.6 1.7 0.5 0.4 1.6 1.9 1.1 0.9

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.8 1.8 0.6 0.4 2.2 2.1 1.2 0.6

60 percent or more ........................... 2.0 1.9 0.6 0.2 2.2 1.9 1.1 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2......................... 1.4 1.5 0.4 0.2 1.7 1.6 0.9 0.6

Math/science..................................... 1.6 1.5 0.7 0.3 1.9 2.0 0.9 0.6

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.3 1.3 0.5 0.3 1.6 1.6 1.1 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.6 1.5 0.7 0.4 2.8 2.0 1.2 1.0

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.6 1.7 0.8 0.4 2.0 2.1 1.4 0.9

10 to 19 years................................... 1.9 1.9 0.7 0.3 2.0 2.0 1.2 0.7

20 or more years............................... 1.4 1.5 0.4 0.3 1.6 1.6 1.1 0.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.2 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.5

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.7 3.7 0.7 0.5 4.2 3.9 1.7 0.8

Other ................................................. 3.5 3.4 1.1 0.5 4.0 3.3 2.1 1.5

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.4 1.5 0.6 0.4 1.5 1.5 1.3 0.7

Female............................................... 1.1 1.1 0.4 0.2 1.2 1.1 0.7 0.5

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

2The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-59

Table B-16.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to

do various activities in the classroom, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1998

Implement new methods of teaching

(e.g., cooperative learning)

Implement state or district curriculum

and performance standards

School and teacher characteristic Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

All targeted public school

teachers2.................................. 41 41 16 2 36 41 20 3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 42 42 15 1 35 42 21 3

Middle school................................... 45 40 14 2 41 41 16 2

High school....................................... 38 40 19 3 38 37 20 5

Combined ......................................... 26 47 21 6 27 45 25 3

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 36 41 21 2 32 39 26 3

300 to 499......................................... 39 42 17 2 31 47 20 2

500 to 999......................................... 42 41 15 2 38 40 19 3

1,000 or more ................................... 42 41 15 2 40 38 19 4

Locale

Central city ....................................... 44 41 14 1 38 40 18 4

Urban fringe/large town................... 43 40 15 2 38 41 19 2

Rural/small town.............................. 35 43 20 2 32 42 22 3

Region

Northeast........................................... 44 38 15 2 32 42 22 5

Midwest ............................................ 39 41 18 2 30 41 25 4

South................................................. 40 43 16 1 43 40 15 2

West .................................................. 43 42 13 1 35 41 21 3

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 35 43 19 3 30 42 24 4

6 to 20 percent.................................. 44 37 16 2 38 39 20 3

21 to 50 percent................................ 41 44 14 1 40 43 15 2

More than 50 percent....................... 43 40 15 1 37 39 21 3

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 45 38 14 2 38 39 19 4

15 to 32 percent................................ 40 41 16 3 37 41 19 4

33 to 59 percent................................ 39 43 17 1 35 43 19 2

60 percent or more ........................... 39 42 17 1 35 40 22 3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3......................... 42 42 15 1 35 42 21 3

Math/science..................................... 34 43 21 2 35 42 20 3

Other targeted academic subject ..... 44 39 15 2 40 39 17 4

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 37 45 16 1 28 47 22 3

4 to 9 years ....................................... 44 42 13 1 36 41 20 3

10 to 19 years................................... 41 41 15 2 37 41 19 3

20 or more years............................... 40 39 18 3 39 39 19 3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 40 41 17 2 35 41 20 3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 46 42 11 1 43 40 16 2

Other ................................................. 43 42 13 2 44 36 17 3

Sex

Male .................................................. 34 40 22 3 34 41 21 4

Female............................................... 43 41 14 1 37 41 19 3
B-60

Table B-16.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to

do various activities in the classroom, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1998 (continued)

Integrate educational technology

into the grade or subject taught Use student performance assessment techniques

School and teacher characteristic Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

All targeted public school

teachers2.................................. 20 37 34 9 28 41 26 4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 18 37 36 9 28 43 25 3

Middle school................................... 23 38 31 8 30 42 23 5

High school....................................... 24 36 31 10 29 36 29 6

Combined ......................................... 23 38 31 8 20 44 30 5

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 20 34 35 11 27 38 29 6

300 to 499......................................... 18 37 37 8 26 44 27 3

500 to 999......................................... 19 39 34 9 27 44 25 4

1,000 or more ................................... 26 35 29 9 34 35 25 6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 22 37 32 9 32 41 23 4

Urban fringe/large town................... 20 39 32 9 29 42 25 4

Rural/small town.............................. 18 36 38 8 24 41 30 5

Region

Northeast........................................... 22 36 35 8 29 37 29 5

Midwest ............................................ 17 38 35 10 23 43 29 5

South................................................. 22 38 31 8 33 41 22 4

West .................................................. 20 35 35 9 26 43 27 4

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 17 36 37 9 24 42 30 4

6 to 20 percent.................................. 20 38 34 9 28 41 26 6

21 to 50 percent................................ 23 39 31 8 29 42 25 4

More than 50 percent....................... 22 36 33 9 33 40 22 4

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 23 38 31 8 28 39 27 5

15 to 32 percent................................ 20 36 36 8 26 42 27 4

33 to 59 percent................................ 18 38 34 10 28 44 25 4

60 percent or more ........................... 20 37 33 9 32 40 24 3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3......................... 18 37 36 9 29 44 25 3

Math/science..................................... 25 38 30 8 24 41 30 6

Other targeted academic subject ..... 21 37 33 9 31 38 25 5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 24 38 32 7 23 44 29 4

4 to 9 years ....................................... 23 41 30 7 27 44 26 3

10 to 19 years................................... 19 36 35 10 29 40 26 5

20 or more years............................... 19 36 36 10 30 40 25 5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 19 37 34 9 27 42 27 4

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 30 38 27 4 46 38 16 *

Other ................................................. 23 33 31 13 33 40 20 7

Sex

Male .................................................. 24 37 30 8 23 40 31 6

Female............................................... 19 37 35 9 30 42 24 4
B-61

Table B-16.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to

do various activities in the classroom, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1998 (continued)

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom

Address the needs of students with limited

English proficiency or from diverse cultural

backgrounds1

School and teacher characteristic

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

All targeted public school

teachers2.................................. 71 24 4 1 20 33 30 17

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 71 24 3 1 21 35 28 16

Middle school................................... 73 22 4 1 18 36 29 17

High school....................................... 69 24 6 1 19 28 35 18

Combined ......................................... 62 29 7 2 21 35 26 18

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 66 27 6 1 13 24 43 20

300 to 499......................................... 68 27 5 1 18 28 32 21

500 to 999......................................... 73 23 3 1 19 37 27 17

1,000 or more ................................... 72 22 4 1 24 33 30 13

Locale

Central city ....................................... 71 23 5 1 24 36 29 11

Urban fringe/large town................... 73 22 4 1 18 34 30 18

Rural/small town.............................. 67 27 4 1 15 28 32 25

Region

Northeast........................................... 73 22 5 * 18 35 28 19

Midwest ............................................ 70 23 5 2 15 27 32 26

South................................................. 69 27 4 1 19 32 32 17

West .................................................. 73 23 3 * 26 39 27 9

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 69 26 4 2 10 25 34 31

6 to 20 percent.................................. 74 22 3 * 15 33 33 19

21 to 50 percent................................ 73 22 4 1 20 34 31 15

More than 50 percent....................... 68 26 6 1 27 37 25 11

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 74 22 3 1 17 32 32 20

15 to 32 percent................................ 72 23 4 1 17 31 34 18

33 to 59 percent................................ 69 26 4 1 16 34 32 17

60 percent or more ........................... 68 26 5 1 27 35 24 13

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3......................... 71 25 4 1 22 35 28 16

Math/science..................................... 68 26 5 1 13 28 37 21

Other targeted academic subject ..... 73 22 5 1 22 35 28 15

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 54 36 9 1 18 35 34 13

4 to 9 years ....................................... 70 25 3 1 21 32 30 17

10 to 19 years................................... 72 24 3 1 22 37 28 13

20 or more years............................... 76 20 3 1 18 31 30 21

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 71 24 4 1 17 33 31 19

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 69 25 5 1 26 33 35 7

Other ................................................. 72 21 6 * 43 31 19 7

Sex

Male .................................................. 68 24 5 2 17 29 36 18

Female............................................... 72 24 4 1 21 35 28 16
B-62

Table B-16.—Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well prepared they feel to

do various activities in the classroom, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1998 (continued)

Address the needs of students with disabilities1

School and teacher characteristic Very well

prepared

Moderately

well prepared

Somewhat

well prepared

Not at all

prepared

All targeted public school teachers2.......... 21 41 30 7

School instructional level

Elementary school........................................... 22 42 30 7

Middle school.................................................. 23 44 27 6

High school...................................................... 19 36 35 10

Combined ........................................................ 17 45 31 7

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 25 42 30 4

300 to 499........................................................ 21 41 31 7

500 to 999........................................................ 21 43 29 7

1,000 or more .................................................. 21 37 32 10

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 21 37 33 9

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 21 42 30 8

Rural/small town............................................. 22 44 29 5

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 22 38 32 9

Midwest ........................................................... 19 44 30 6

South................................................................ 23 40 31 7

West ................................................................. 19 43 30 8

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 20 45 29 5

6 to 20 percent................................................. 23 43 27 7

21 to 50 percent............................................... 23 38 32 7

More than 50 percent...................................... 18 37 34 11

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 22 43 28 6

15 to 32 percent............................................... 20 42 31 7

33 to 59 percent............................................... 22 41 31 6

60 percent or more .......................................... 20 37 33 10

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3........................................ 21 43 30 6

Math/science.................................................... 19 40 31 10

Other targeted academic subject .................... 22 40 31 8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 15 41 34 9

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 21 39 33 8

10 to 19 years.................................................. 25 44 25 6

20 or more years.............................................. 21 40 32 7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 21 41 31 7

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 24 37 31 8

Other ................................................................ 21 40 30 9

Sex

Male ................................................................. 17 37 37 9

Female.............................................................. 22 43 28 7

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1

Percents are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

2Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

3The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each type of professional development program, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
B-63

Table B-16a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how

well prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998

Implement new methods of teaching

(e.g., cooperative learning)

Implement state or district curriculum

and performance standards

School and teacher characteristic Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

All targeted public school

teachers2.................................. 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.3 1.2 1.1 0.4 1.4 1.7 1.4 0.6

Middle school................................... 1.4 1.7 1.1 0.4 1.8 1.8 1.1 0.5

High school....................................... 1.5 1.7 1.4 0.5 1.2 1.5 1.4 0.7

Combined ......................................... 2.7 3.8 3.0 1.9 3.4 4.3 3.3 1.0

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.1 2.6 2.2 1.1 2.6 2.8 3.2 1.1

300 to 499......................................... 1.8 2.0 1.7 0.5 2.0 2.4 2.0 0.6

500 to 999......................................... 1.6 1.5 1.0 0.3 1.5 1.8 1.2 0.5

1,000 or more ................................... 1.5 1.7 1.3 0.5 1.5 1.4 1.4 0.6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.6 1.6 1.2 0.3 1.5 2.0 1.3 0.6

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.7 1.7 1.1 0.4 1.6 1.6 1.4 0.4

Rural/small town.............................. 1.6 1.7 1.2 0.5 1.7 1.5 1.6 0.6

Region

Northeast........................................... 2.3 2.1 1.8 0.8 2.1 1.9 1.8 0.9

Midwest ............................................ 1.5 1.9 1.6 0.5 1.7 2.3 2.0 0.9

South................................................. 1.6 1.6 1.2 0.4 1.4 1.7 1.5 0.4

West .................................................. 2.3 2.6 1.8 0.4 1.7 1.9 1.7 0.6

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 2.0 2.0 1.6 0.6 1.7 2.1 2.1 0.7

6 to 20 percent.................................. 2.1 1.7 1.4 0.5 1.9 2.0 1.5 0.6

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.8 1.8 1.3 0.3 1.9 2.1 1.5 0.6

More than 50 percent....................... 2.2 2.1 1.4 0.3 2.0 2.1 2.2 0.6

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 2.2 1.7 1.3 0.8 1.9 1.6 1.7 0.8

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.9 2.3 1.4 0.6 1.6 1.8 1.5 0.6

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.8 2.1 1.4 0.4 1.8 2.5 2.0 0.5

60 percent or more ........................... 2.0 1.7 1.4 0.4 1.8 2.2 2.1 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3

......................... 1.3 1.4 1.1 0.4 1.3 1.7 1.5 0.6

Math/science..................................... 1.6 1.6 1.2 0.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.6

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.4 1.4 1.0 0.4 1.2 1.6 1.1 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.0 1.9 1.3 0.4 1.9 2.2 2.1 0.7

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.8 2.0 1.2 0.3 1.7 1.9 2.2 0.7

10 to 19 years................................... 1.9 1.9 1.4 0.5 2.0 2.0 1.8 0.6

20 or more years............................... 1.8 1.8 1.3 0.5 1.3 1.7 1.5 0.6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.3 0.9 1.0 1.1 0.4

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 4.4 3.8 2.6 0.8 3.5 3.6 2.9 1.1

Other ................................................. 3.7 3.4 2.5 0.9 3.5 3.5 2.5 1.2

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.7 1.5 1.3 0.6 1.5 1.7 1.6 0.6

Female............................................... 1.0 1.1 0.8 0.3 1.1 1.3 1.1 0.4
B-64

Table B-16a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how

well prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Integrate educational technology

into the grade or subject taught Use student performance assessment techniques

School and teacher characteristic Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

All targeted public school

teachers2.................................. 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.1 1.6 1.5 0.9 1.6 1.6 1.4 0.7

Middle school................................... 1.5 1.8 1.6 1.1 1.7 1.8 1.8 0.7

High school....................................... 1.2 1.1 1.3 0.7 1.6 1.6 1.2 0.7

Combined ......................................... 3.2 3.9 3.1 1.9 3.0 4.4 3.0 1.6

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.4 3.3 3.5 2.6 2.4 2.9 3.0 1.7

300 to 499......................................... 1.9 2.2 2.1 1.0 2.1 2.1 2.0 0.6

500 to 999......................................... 1.2 1.5 1.3 0.8 1.5 1.6 1.3 0.6

1,000 or more ................................... 1.5 1.6 1.7 0.9 1.9 1.8 1.1 0.8

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.6 2.0 1.5 1.0 1.8 1.8 1.4 0.7

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.4 1.4 1.8 0.9 1.5 1.5 1.4 0.8

Rural/small town.............................. 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.3 1.7 1.7 0.7

Region

Northeast........................................... 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.1 2.1 2.2 1.5 1.1

Midwest ............................................ 1.6 1.9 2.2 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.6 0.9

South................................................. 1.3 1.7 1.5 1.1 1.6 1.5 1.5 0.6

West .................................................. 1.9 1.7 2.0 1.4 2.3 2.5 1.7 0.9

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.6 2.0 1.5 0.7

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.2 2.2 1.8 1.5 0.9

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.1 1.7 1.8 1.5 0.7

More than 50 percent....................... 1.6 2.1 1.8 1.0 2.2 2.1 1.8 0.8

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.4 1.3 1.7 0.8 2.2 1.9 1.4 1.0

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.3 0.8

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.2 1.9 2.1 2.0 0.7

60 percent or more ........................... 1.4 1.9 1.6 1.0 1.9 2.1 2.0 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3

......................... 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.6 1.4 0.7

Math/science..................................... 1.6 1.7 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.5 0.8

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.3 1.5 1.4 0.8 1.3 1.3 1.2 0.7

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.7 1.9 2.2 1.0 1.7 2.3 2.1 0.7

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.0 1.5 1.8 1.5 0.6

10 to 19 years................................... 1.9 2.0 2.2 1.2 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.0

20 or more years............................... 1.4 1.6 1.7 0.9 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.6 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.5

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.1 3.5 3.6 1.2 3.8 3.4 2.5 0.2

Other ................................................. 2.6 3.4 3.4 2.2 3.2 3.4 2.7 2.4

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.0 1.6 1.5 1.4 0.8

Female............................................... 0.8 1.2 1.2 0.6 1.2 1.3 1.0 0.5
B-65

Table B-16a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how

well prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom

Address the needs of students with limited

English proficiency or from diverse cultural

backgrounds1

School and teacher characteristic

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

Very well

prepared

Moderately well

prepared

Somewhat well

prepared

Not

at all

prepared

All targeted public school

teachers2.................................. 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.2 1.1 1.4 1.0 0.9

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 1.2 1.1 0.5 0.3 1.9 2.2 1.9 1.6

Middle school................................... 1.3 1.3 0.7 0.4 1.6 2.0 2.6 1.8

High school....................................... 1.3 1.4 0.8 0.3 1.7 1.8 2.0 1.6

Combined ......................................... 4.1 3.7 1.8 0.9 6.0 5.4 4.4 4.0

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 2.9 2.5 1.4 0.8 3.1 3.6 4.2 3.9

300 to 499......................................... 1.7 1.7 1.0 0.4 2.7 2.7 3.2 2.8

500 to 999......................................... 1.4 1.2 0.5 0.3 1.5 2.2 2.0 1.4

1,000 or more ................................... 1.4 1.4 0.7 0.3 1.8 1.9 1.5 1.4

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.6 1.5 0.7 0.3 1.8 2.7 1.9 1.4

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.2 1.1 0.5 0.3 1.6 1.9 2.0 1.5

Rural/small town.............................. 1.7 1.5 0.7 0.3 2.2 2.7 2.2 2.3

Region

Northeast........................................... 1.7 1.7 0.9 0.2 2.4 2.9 2.7 2.0

Midwest ............................................ 1.9 1.7 0.7 0.5 2.1 2.5 2.6 2.8

South................................................. 1.1 1.1 0.5 0.3 1.6 1.9 1.8 1.5

West .................................................. 1.9 1.8 0.6 0.2 2.5 2.8 2.7 1.5

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 1.6 1.3 0.7 0.4 2.0 2.9 3.2 3.2

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.4 1.5 0.6 0.3 1.9 2.6 2.1 1.9

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.7 1.7 0.6 0.4 1.9 2.5 2.3 1.7

More than 50 percent....................... 1.6 1.6 0.8 0.3 2.4 2.4 1.9 1.3

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.5 1.4 0.6 0.3 1.8 2.1 1.9 2.0

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.4 1.8 2.6 2.3 2.1

33 to 59 percent................................ 2.0 1.6 0.7 0.4 2.0 2.7 2.4 1.8

60 percent or more ........................... 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.3 2.4 2.2 2.1 1.6

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3

......................... 1.2 1.1 0.5 0.3 1.9 2.3 2.0 1.7

Math/science..................................... 1.4 1.5 0.6 0.4 1.4 2.0 2.4 2.0

Other targeted academic subject ..... 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.3 1.4 1.9 1.7 1.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 2.0 1.8 1.3 0.5 1.9 2.7 2.7 1.6

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.7 1.8 0.7 0.4 2.2 2.5 2.8 1.9

10 to 19 years................................... 1.7 1.4 0.7 0.4 2.0 2.4 2.3 1.8

20 or more years............................... 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.2 1.8 2.1 1.8 1.7

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.2 1.0 1.6 1.1 1.1

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 3.6 3.5 1.4 0.8 4.2 5.2 4.7 2.4

Other ................................................. 3.0 2.8 1.7 0.3 5.1 4.7 3.5 2.2

Sex

Male .................................................. 1.5 1.4 0.6 0.4 1.5 2.1 2.0 1.8

Female............................................... 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.2 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.0
B-66

Table B-16a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how

well prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1998 (continued)

Address the needs of students with disabilities1

School and teacher characteristic Very well

prepared

Moderately

well prepared

Somewhat

well prepared

Not at all

prepared

All targeted public school teachers2.......... 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.6

School instructional level

Elementary school........................................... 1.5 1.9 1.6 1.0

Middle school.................................................. 1.7 2.4 2.1 0.9

High school...................................................... 1.4 1.9 1.7 1.1

Combined ........................................................ 3.3 3.9 4.0 1.9

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 2.9 3.7 4.3 1.0

300 to 499........................................................ 2.2 2.8 2.3 1.4

500 to 999........................................................ 1.5 1.8 1.4 0.9

1,000 or more .................................................. 1.6 2.0 1.9 1.1

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 1.7 2.2 2.1 1.3

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 1.4 1.9 1.5 1.0

Rural/small town............................................. 1.5 2.3 1.9 0.8

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 2.1 2.7 2.7 1.4

Midwest ........................................................... 1.5 2.2 2.2 1.1

South................................................................ 1.4 1.9 1.6 0.9

West ................................................................. 2.2 2.4 2.3 1.5

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 1.9 2.1 2.0 0.8

6 to 20 percent................................................. 1.9 2.5 2.1 1.1

21 to 50 percent............................................... 2.0 2.3 2.2 1.2

More than 50 percent...................................... 1.9 2.4 2.4 1.4

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 1.7 2.4 2.1 0.9

15 to 32 percent............................................... 1.6 2.1 2.1 1.0

33 to 59 percent............................................... 1.8 2.2 2.6 1.0

60 percent or more .......................................... 1.6 2.1 2.1 1.5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary3

........................................ 1.6 1.9 1.6 0.9

Math/science.................................................... 1.9 2.4 2.2 1.1

Other targeted academic subject .................... 1.4 1.7 1.7 0.8

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 1.9 2.3 2.2 1.4

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 1.6 2.6 2.4 1.1

10 to 19 years.................................................. 2.1 2.5 2.1 1.1

20 or more years.............................................. 1.6 1.9 1.7 1.2

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.7

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 4.0 4.8 5.2 2.5

Other ................................................................ 3.6 4.8 4.1 2.5

Sex

Male ................................................................. 1.5 2.4 2.1 1.2

Female.............................................................. 1.1 1.3 1.2 0.7

1Estimates are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

2Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

3The category labeled general elementary includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of instructional

level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
C-1

Appendix C

Detailed Tables of Estimates

and

Tables of Standard Errors

for the

1993-94 SASS Study
C-2
C-3

Table of Contents

Detailed Tables of Estimates and Tables of Standard Errors

for the 1993-94 SASS Study

Table Page

C-1 Number and percent of full-time public school teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94.............................................................................. 5

C-1a Standard errors of the number and percent of full-time public school teachers,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 .......................................... 6

C-2 Average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher in the current school

for full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 7

C-2a Standard errors of the average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher

in the current school for full-time public school teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94.............................................................................. 8

C-3 Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold bachelor’s, master’s, and

doctorates, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94......................... 9

C-3a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who hold

bachelor’s, master’s, and doctorates, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 10

C-4 Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms with

various types of teaching certificates in their state, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 11

C-4a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms with various types of teaching certificates in their state,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 .......................................... 12

C-5 Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with

various types of teaching certificates in their state in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 ............... 13

C-5a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in

departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state

in their main teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 14

C-6 Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with

various types of teaching certificates in their state in their secondary teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 ............... 15

C-6a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in

departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state

in their secondary teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 16
C-4

Table of Contents (continued)

Detailed Tables of Estimates and Tables of Standard Errors

for the 1993-94 SASS Study (continued)

Table Page

C-7 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 ............... 17

C-7a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 18

C-8 Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported

having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 ............... 19

C-8a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 20

C-9 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in in-service or

professional development activities of various lengths that focused on various

topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 .............................. 21

C-9a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who

participated in in-service or professional development activities of various

lengths that focused on various topics, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94 ......................................................................................... 24

C-10 Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program during their first year of teaching and percent of full-time public school

teachers who are currently a master or mentor teacher in a formal teacher

induction program, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94............ 27

C-10a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who

participated in a formal induction program during their first year of teaching and

percent of full-time public school teachers who are currently a master or mentor

teacher in a formal teacher induction program, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 28

C-11 Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 29

C-11a Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in

general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 ....................................................................... 30

C-12 Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94 ............................................................................. 31

C-12a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or

disagreeing with selected statements about parent and school support for

teachers, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94............................ 33
C-5

Table C-1.—Number and percent of full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic Number Percent

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 1,427,637 100

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 751,896 53

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 249,962 18

High school.......................................................................................................................... 312,903 22

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 112,875 8

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 154,837 11

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 333,264 23

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 640,920 45

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 298,617 21

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 377,354 26

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 454,223 32

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 596,061 42

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 280,182 20

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 340,980 24

South.................................................................................................................................... 539,154 38

West ..................................................................................................................................... 267,322 19

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 496,511 35

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 333,358 23

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 296,121 21

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 301,648 21

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 374,373 27

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 368,534 26

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 358,508 25

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 305,214 22

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 717,116 50

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 300,811 21

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 409,711 29

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 168,917 12

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 284,902 20

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 420,281 29

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 553,537 39

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 1,246,618 87

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 101,743 7

Other .................................................................................................................................... 79,276 6

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 352,900 25

Female.................................................................................................................................. 1,074,737 75

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals because of rounding. Percents are computed within each classification variable, but may not sum to 100

because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-6

Table C-1a.—Standard errors of the number and percent of full-time public school teachers, by

selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic Number Percent

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 16,613 *

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 14,474 0.7

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 10,464 0.7

High school.......................................................................................................................... 5,997 0.3

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 3,197 0.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 4,067 0.4

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 7,365 0.5

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 13,994 0.7

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 9,285 0.5

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 9,720 0.5

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 11,275 0.6

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 8,452 0.6

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 7,119 0.4

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 6,328 0.3

South.................................................................................................................................... 7,700 0.5

West ..................................................................................................................................... 6,332 0.4

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 9,543 0.6

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 9,533 0.7

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 9,251 0.6

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 11,830 0.7

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 11,061 0.7

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 11,657 0.8

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 10,207 0.7

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 11,271 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 12,428 0.6

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 5,492 0.3

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 8,305 0.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years...................................................................................................................

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 4,742 0.3

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 5,661 0.3

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 7,282 0.5

10,098 0.4

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 16,522 0.4

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 3,892 0.3

Other .................................................................................................................................... 4,277 0.3

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 7,485 0.4

Female.................................................................................................................................. 14,266 0.4

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-7

Table C-2.—Average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher in the current school for

full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1993-94

School and teacher characteristic Total years as a teacher Years as a teacher in the

current school

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 16 10

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 15 10

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 15 9

High school.......................................................................................................................... 17 12

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 16 11

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 16 11

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 16 11

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 15 10

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 16 10

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 15 9

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 16 10

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 15 11

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 18 13

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 17 12

South.................................................................................................................................... 14 9

West ..................................................................................................................................... 15 9

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 16 12

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 16 10

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 16 9

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 14 9

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 17 11

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 16 10

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 15 10

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 14 9

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 15 10

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 16 11

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 16 11

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 2 2

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 6 5

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 15 9

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 26 17

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 16 10

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 17 10

Other .................................................................................................................................... 13 8

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 17 12

Female.................................................................................................................................. 15 10

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

NOTE: Details may not sum to totals because of rounding. Percents are computed within each classification variable, but may not sum to 100

because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-8

Table C-2a.—Standard errors of the average number of total years as a teacher and as a teacher in

the current school for full-time public school teachers, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic Total years as a teacher Years as a teacher in the

current school

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 0.1 0.1

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.2

High school.......................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 0.2 0.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 0.2 0.2

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 0.2 0.1

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 0.1 0.1

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 0.2 0.3

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

South.................................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

West ..................................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.2

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 0.2 0.2

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 0.1 0.1

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 0.1 0.1

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 0.2 0.1

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 0.02 0.04

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 0.04 0.1

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 0.04 0.1

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 0.1 0.1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 0.4 0.3

Other .................................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

Female.................................................................................................................................. 0.1 0.1

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-9

Table C-3.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold bachelor’s, master’s, and

doctorates, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree Doctorate degree

All targeted public school teachers1............................................................... 100** 46 1

School instructional level

Elementary school................................................................................................ 99 42 *

Middle school....................................................................................................... 99 46 1

High school........................................................................................................... 100** 55 1

Combined ............................................................................................................. 100** 47 1

School enrollment size

Less than 300........................................................................................................ 99 36 1

300 to 499............................................................................................................. 100** 45 *

500 to 999............................................................................................................. 99 45 *

1,000 or more ....................................................................................................... 100** 54 1

Locale

Central city ........................................................................................................... 100** 49 1

Urban fringe/large town....................................................................................... 99 49 1

Rural/small town.................................................................................................. 100** 41 *

Region

Northeast............................................................................................................... 100** 60 1

Midwest ................................................................................................................ 100** 47 *

South..................................................................................................................... 99 42 1

West ...................................................................................................................... 99 37 1

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less.................................................................................................... 100** 47 *

6 to 20 percent...................................................................................................... 99 48 1

21 to 50 percent.................................................................................................... 100** 44 1

More than 50 percent........................................................................................... 99 43 1

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ............................................................................................ 100** 53 1

15 to 32 percent.................................................................................................... 100** 46 *

33 to 59 percent.................................................................................................... 99 41 1

60 percent or more ............................................................................................... 99 41 1

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

............................................................................................. 99 41 *

Math/science......................................................................................................... 100** 50 1

Other targeted academic subject ......................................................................... 100** 51 1

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................................... 99 15 1

4 to 9 years ........................................................................................................... 100** 30 *

10 to 19 years....................................................................................................... 99 49 1

20 or more years................................................................................................... 99 61 1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ............................................................................................ 100** 46 1

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................. 99 52 1

Other ..................................................................................................................... 100** 36 2

Sex

Male ...................................................................................................................... 100** 53 1

Female................................................................................................................... 99 43 *

*Less than 0.5 percent.

**Rounds to 100 percent for presentation in the tables.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-10

Table C-3a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who hold

bachelor’s, master’s, and doctorates, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1993-94

School and teacher characteristic Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree Doctorate degree

All targeted public school teachers1............................................................... 0.1 0.5 0.1

School instructional level

Elementary school................................................................................................ 0.1 0.7 0.1

Middle school....................................................................................................... 0.2 1.4 0.2

High school........................................................................................................... 0.1 0.7 0.1

Combined ............................................................................................................. 0.1 0.8 0.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300........................................................................................................ 0.2 1.3 0.3

300 to 499............................................................................................................. 0.1 1.1 0.2

500 to 999............................................................................................................. 0.2 0.8 0.1

1,000 or more ....................................................................................................... 0.1 0.9 0.1

Locale

Central city ........................................................................................................... 0.1 1.2 0.2

Urban fringe/large town....................................................................................... 0.2 0.9 0.1

Rural/small town.................................................................................................. 0.1 0.7 0.1

Region

Northeast............................................................................................................... 0.1 1.1 0.2

Midwest ................................................................................................................ 0.1 1.2 0.04

South..................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.7 0.2

West ...................................................................................................................... 0.3 1.2 0.1

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less.................................................................................................... 0.1 1.0 0.1

6 to 20 percent...................................................................................................... 0.2 1.1 0.1

21 to 50 percent.................................................................................................... 0.1 1.0 0.2

More than 50 percent........................................................................................... 0.1 1.3 0.2

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ............................................................................................ 0.1 1.0 0.1

15 to 32 percent.................................................................................................... 0.1 0.9 0.1

33 to 59 percent.................................................................................................... 0.1 1.0 0.1

60 percent or more ............................................................................................... 0.2 1.2 0.2

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

............................................................................................. 0.1 0.7 0.1

Math/science......................................................................................................... 0.1 0.8 0.1

Other targeted academic subject ......................................................................... 0.1 0.9 0.2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................................... 0.3 1.0 0.3

4 to 9 years ........................................................................................................... 0.1 1.1 0.2

10 to 19 years....................................................................................................... 0.1 1.1 0.1

20 or more years................................................................................................... 0.1 0.9 0.1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ............................................................................................ 0.1 0.6 0.1

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................. 0.3 1.8 0.2

Other ..................................................................................................................... 0.2 1.7 0.5

Sex

Male ...................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.9 0.2

Female................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.6 0.1

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-11

Table C-4.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms with

various types of teaching certificates in their state, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher

characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 94 2 2 1 * 1

School instructional level2

Elementary school..................... 94 2 2 1 * 1

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................. 97 1 1 1 * 1

300 to 499.................................. 94 2 2 * * 1

500 to 999.................................. 93 1 2 1 * 1

1,000 or more ............................ 86 1 3 5 1 4

Locale

Central city ................................ 90 2 2 2 * 2

Urban fringe/large town............ 96 1 2 1 * 1

Rural/small town....................... 95 2 1 1 * 1

Region

Northeast.................................... 91 2 3 1 * 2

Midwest ..................................... 95 3 1 * 0 1

South.......................................... 95 1 2 1 * 1

West ........................................... 92 * 2 2 1 2

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 95 1 1 1 * 1

6 to 20 percent........................... 95 2 2 1 0 *

21 to 50 percent......................... 94 1 2 1 * 1

More than 50 percent................ 90 2 2 1 1 2

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 96 1 1 1 0 *

15 to 32 percent......................... 96 1 1 * * 1

33 to 59 percent......................... 93 2 2 1 * 1

60 percent or more .................... 91 2 2 1 1 2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 73 5 9 5 2 3

4 to 9 years ................................ 92 2 2 1 * 1

10 to 19 years............................ 97 1 * * 0 1

20 or more years........................ 99 * * * * 1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................. 95 1 2 1 * 1

Black, non-Hispanic.................. 87 4 0 1 1 4

Other .......................................... 89 2 4 1 1 3

Sex

Male ........................................... 91 2 3 1 * 3

Female........................................ 94 2 1 1 * 1

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in

analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in general elementary classrooms include teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that

their main teaching assignment was general elementary. Percents are computed across each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

Zeros indicate that no teacher in the sample gave the indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-12

Table C-4a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms with various types of teaching certificates in their state, by

selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher

characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school

teachers1........................... 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2

School instructional level2

Elementary school..................... 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................. 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.5

300 to 499.................................. 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2

500 to 999.................................. 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3

1,000 or more ............................ 3.8 0.9 1.5 1.7 0.8 1.8

Locale

Central city ................................ 1.2 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.6

Urban fringe/large town............ 0.7 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.2

Rural/small town....................... 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Region

Northeast.................................... 1.4 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.8

Midwest ..................................... 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.1 * 0.2

South.......................................... 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.01 0.2

West ........................................... 1.3 0.1 0.4 0.7 0.6 0.5

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less......................... 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.01 0.3

6 to 20 percent........................... 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 * 0.1

21 to 50 percent......................... 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.4

More than 50 percent................ 1.5 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.7

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reducedprice school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................. 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.5 * 0.3

15 to 32 percent......................... 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.4

33 to 59 percent......................... 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3

60 percent or more .................... 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years......................... 2.8 1.2 1.5 1.1 1.0 0.8

4 to 9 years ................................ 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2

10 to 19 years............................ 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 * 0.4

20 or more years........................ 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................. 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1

Black, non-Hispanic.................. 2.5 1.7 * 0.8 0.8 1.3

Other .......................................... 2.3 0.7 1.2 0.4 0.3 1.5

Sex

Male ........................................... 1.4 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.1 0.8

Female........................................ 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in

analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in general elementary classrooms include teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that

their main teaching assignment was general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-13

Table C-5.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with various types of

teaching certificates in their state in their main teaching assignment field, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school teachers1...... 90 2 2 1 * 4

School instructional level2

Middle school.............................................. 87 2 2 1 * 7

High school.................................................. 93 2 2 1 * 2

Combined .................................................... 92 2 2 1 * 3

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... 91 2 2 1 * 4

300 to 499.................................................... 88 3 2 1 * 6

500 to 999.................................................... 89 2 1 1 * 5

1,000 or more .............................................. 91 2 2 1 1 3

Locale

Central city .................................................. 88 2 1 1 1 6

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 91 2 2 1 * 4

Rural/small town......................................... 90 2 2 1 * 4

Region

Northeast...................................................... 89 3 2 2 * 4

Midwest ....................................................... 92 3 1 1 * 3

South............................................................ 90 2 2 1 * 5

West ............................................................. 88 1 2 2 1 5

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 91 2 2 1 * 4

6 to 20 percent............................................. 90 2 2 1 * 4

21 to 50 percent........................................... 91 1 1 1 * 4

More than 50 percent.................................. 87 3 1 1 1 7

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 91 2 2 1 * 3

15 to 32 percent........................................... 91 1 2 1 * 3

33 to 59 percent........................................... 89 2 2 1 1 6

60 percent or more ...................................... 86 3 1 1 * 8

Main teaching assignment

Math/science................................................ 88 2 1 1 1 5

Other targeted academic subject ................ 91 2 2 1 * 4

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 66 8 11 4 2 9

4 to 9 years .................................................. 86 3 1 2 * 5

10 to 19 years.............................................. 94 1 * * * 4

20 or more years.......................................... 96 * 0 * 0 3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 91 2 2 1 * 4

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... 82 5 * 3 1 8

Other ............................................................ 83 2 2 2 1 7

Sex

Male ............................................................. 92 2 1 1 1 3

Female.......................................................... 89 2 2 1 * 6

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in English/language arts,

social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other

school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in departmentalized settings include teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main

teaching assignment was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science. Percents are computed across

each row, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Zeros indicate that no teacher in the sample gave the indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations, 1998.
C-14

Table C-5a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized

settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state in their main teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school teachers1...... 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3

School instructional level2

Middle school.............................................. 0.9 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.6

High school.................................................. 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2

Combined .................................................... 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... 1.0 0.3 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.7

300 to 499.................................................... 1.7 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 1.3

500 to 999.................................................... 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4

1,000 or more .............................................. 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4

Locale

Central city .................................................. 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.8

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.5

Rural/small town......................................... 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4

Region

Northeast...................................................... 1.2 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.8

Midwest ....................................................... 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.01 0.4

South............................................................ 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4

West ............................................................. 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4

6 to 20 percent............................................. 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.5

21 to 50 percent........................................... 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.6

More than 50 percent.................................. 1.1 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.2 1.1

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.05 0.4

15 to 32 percent........................................... 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4

33 to 59 percent........................................... 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.6

60 percent or more ...................................... 1.5 0.7 0.2 0.5 0.2 1.5

Main teaching assignment

Math/science................................................ 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4

Other targeted academic ............................ 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 1.5 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.5 1.0

4 to 9 years .................................................. 1.2 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8

10 to 19 years.............................................. 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.04 0.5

20 or more years.......................................... 0.4 0.1 * 0.03 * 0.4

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... 2.7 1.5 0.3 1.1 0.8 1.2

Other ............................................................ 2.0 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 1.8

Sex

Male ............................................................. 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5

Female.......................................................... 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in English/language arts,

social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other

school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in departmentalized settings include teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations, 1998.
C-15

Table C-6.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized settings with various types of

teaching certificates in their state in their secondary teaching assignment field, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school teachers1...... 58 2 1 1 * 38

School instructional level2

Middle school.............................................. 55 1 1 1 * 41

High school.................................................. 61 1 1 1 * 33

Combined .................................................... 62 2 1 1 * 32

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... 65 1 * * * 31

300 to 499.................................................... 60 2 1 1 * 36

500 to 999.................................................... 55 2 1 1 * 41

1,000 or more .............................................. 57 1 1 1 * 36

Locale

Central city .................................................. 49 1 1 1 * 46

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 60 1 1 1 * 37

Rural/small town......................................... 61 2 1 1 * 34

Region

Northeast...................................................... 60 3 * * 0 36

Midwest ....................................................... 62 2 1 1 * 33

South............................................................ 57 1 1 * * 39

West ............................................................. 53 1 1 2 * 42

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 61 2 1 1 * 34

6 to 20 percent............................................. 60 1 1 * * 37

21 to 50 percent........................................... 60 1 * 1 * 36

More than 50 percent.................................. 48 1 * 1 * 46

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 61 2 1 1 * 35

15 to 32 percent........................................... 58 2 1 1 * 37

33 to 59 percent........................................... 56 1 1 1 * 38

60 percent or more ...................................... 54 1 1 * * 42

Main teaching assignment

Math/science................................................ 58 2 1 1 * 37

Other targeted academic ............................ 58 1 1 1 * 38

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 36 4 5 2 * 51

4 to 9 years .................................................. 50 2 * 1 * 44

10 to 19 years.............................................. 65 1 1 * * 32

20 or more years.......................................... 64 1 * * * 34

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 59 1 1 1 * 36

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... 41 3 0 0 * 54

Other ............................................................ 50 2 * 2 * 42

Sex

Male ............................................................. 61 1 1 1 * 35

Female.......................................................... 56 2 1 1 * 39

*Less than 0.5 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in English/language arts,

social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other

school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in departmentalized settings include teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science. Percents are computed across each row,

but may not sum to 100 because of rounding. Zeros indicate that no teachers in the sample gave the indicated response.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations, 1998.
C-16

Table C-6a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in departmentalized

settings with various types of teaching certificates in their state in their secondary teaching

assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic

Regular or

standard state

certificate, or

advanced

professional

certificate

Provisional or

other type of

certificate

given while

participating in

an “alternative

certification

program”

Probationary

certificate

Temporary

certificate

Emergency

certificate or

waiver

No certificate

All targeted public school teachers1...... 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.9

School instructional level2

Middle school.............................................. 2.0 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.1 2.0

High school.................................................. 1.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.0

Combined .................................................... 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300............................................... 2.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 2.4

300 to 499.................................................... 2.1 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 2.1

500 to 999.................................................... 1.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.03 1.7

1,000 or more .............................................. 1.5 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 1.3

Locale

Central city .................................................. 2.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.1 2.0

Urban fringe/large town.............................. 1.6 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.5

Rural/small town......................................... 1.3 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.03 1.4

Region

Northeast...................................................... 2.1 1.0 0.2 0.1 * 2.1

Midwest ....................................................... 1.7 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.05 1.5

South............................................................ 1.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.04 1.6

West ............................................................. 2.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 2.2

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less........................................... 1.6 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 1.6

6 to 20 percent............................................. 1.9 0.7 0.4 0.1 0.01 2.0

21 to 50 percent........................................... 2.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.1 2.2

More than 50 percent.................................. 2.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 2.4

Percent of students in school eligible for

free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ................................... 1.7 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.6

15 to 32 percent........................................... 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.1 1.3

33 to 59 percent........................................... 2.7 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.1 2.6

60 percent or more ...................................... 2.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.02 2.1

Main teaching assignment

Math/science................................................ 1.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.3

Other targeted academic subject ................ 1.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 1.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years........................................... 2.6 0.9 1.4 0.5 0.1 3.2

4 to 9 years .................................................. 2.2 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.1 2.2

10 to 19 years.............................................. 1.8 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.1 1.3

20 or more years.......................................... 1.2 0.3 0.02 0.1 0.1 1.3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ................................... 0.9 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.05 0.9

Black, non-Hispanic.................................... 4.4 1.3 * * 0.2 4.8

Other ............................................................ 5.3 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.1 5.3

Sex

Male ............................................................. 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.4

Female.......................................................... 1.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.02 1.2

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in English/language arts,

social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2Data for departmentalized settings are not reported for elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other

school and teacher characteristics.

NOTE: Teachers referred to here as teachers in departmentalized settings include teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations, 1998.
C-17

Table C-7.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment field,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 78 93 87 77 82

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 72 92 81 70 83

300 to 499........................................................ 77 90 86 73 75

500 to 999........................................................ 73 93 83 71 80

1,000 or more .................................................. 84 94 92 85 86

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 78 96 89 76 83

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 79 93 89 77 79

Rural/small town............................................. 77 92 85 78 84

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 80 97 88 82 86

Midwest ........................................................... 78 95 88 80 85

South................................................................ 77 92 86 78 78

West ................................................................. 76 87 87 64 84

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 78 93 88 79 82

6 to 20 percent................................................. 78 94 87 79 89

21 to 50 percent............................................... 81 90 85 77 79

More than 50 percent...................................... 74 96 88 71 77

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 84 94 89 81 86

15 to 32 percent............................................... 78 92 89 79 84

33 to 59 percent............................................... 73 92 84 70 76

60 percent or more .......................................... 70 95 81 70 75

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 81 87 91 80 78

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 76 92 82 72 81

10 to 19 years.................................................. 73 96 86 76 81

20 or more years.............................................. 82 94 88 80 85

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 79 94 87 78 83

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 69 # 85 77 73

Other ................................................................ 69 88 88 63 83

Sex

Male ................................................................. 82 89 90 79 87

Female.............................................................. 77 94 81 75 76

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-18

Table C-7a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.1

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 3.2 2.7 2.9 3.2 2.6

300 to 499........................................................ 2.4 3.6 2.1 3.3 3.1

500 to 999........................................................ 1.8 1.1 1.8 1.8 2.2

1,000 or more .................................................. 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.1 1.4

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 2.1 1.2 1.4 2.2 1.9

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 1.9 1.2 1.5 2.2 2.3

Rural/small town............................................. 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.4

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 2.2 0.6 2.5 2.3 2.2

Midwest ........................................................... 1.7 1.0 1.2 2.3 1.7

South................................................................ 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.7 2.0

West ................................................................. 2.6 2.5 1.6 2.3 2.1

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 1.6 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.8

6 to 20 percent................................................. 1.6 1.2 1.9 2.7 1.4

21 to 50 percent............................................... 1.6 2.4 2.3 2.6 2.2

More than 50 percent...................................... 2.6 1.4 1.8 2.8 2.8

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 1.3 0.9 1.4 1.9 1.4

15 to 32 percent............................................... 1.6 1.7 1.5 2.2 1.2

33 to 59 percent............................................... 2.1 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.6

60 percent or more .......................................... 2.9 1.9 3.2 3.8 3.9

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 3.3 3.3 1.3 2.5 3.4

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 2.6 1.5 2.4 2.7 2.2

10 to 19 years.................................................. 2.1 0.9 1.7 2.1 1.9

20 or more years.............................................. 1.2 1.0 1.4 1.6 1.6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.2

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 4.5 # 2.6 3.7 4.7

Other ................................................................ 6.1 2.3 2.5 6.5 3.7

Sex

Male ................................................................. 1.5 2.1 1.0 1.4 0.9

Female.............................................................. 1.2 0.8 1.6 1.5 2.0

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-19

Table C-8.—Percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through 12 who reported having

an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main teaching assignment

field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 88 93 92 87 90

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 89 90 87 85 92

300 to 499........................................................ 87 93 93 88 88

500 to 999........................................................ 88 92 89 86 91

1,000 or more .................................................. 87 94 93 87 89

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 86 96 94 84 90

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 88 93 91 88 89

Rural/small town............................................. 88 92 91 87 91

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 85 96 93 88 91

Midwest ........................................................... 89 95 90 92 92

South................................................................ 88 92 92 87 87

West ................................................................. 88 88 92 77 90

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 88 94 90 88 91

6 to 20 percent................................................. 88 94 92 89 94

21 to 50 percent............................................... 87 90 91 88 85

More than 50 percent...................................... 87 95 94 80 87

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 89 94 91 87 91

15 to 32 percent............................................... 86 92 92 88 89

33 to 59 percent............................................... 88 93 92 84 86

60 percent or more .......................................... 89 95 90 83 91

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 91 88 90 90 88

4 to 9 years...................................................... 84 91 91 82 88

10 to 19 years.................................................. 87 96 91 85 88

20 or more years.............................................. 88 94 92 89 92

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 88 94 92 87 90

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 92 # 87 81 88

Other ................................................................ 81 87 92 84 85

Sex

Male ................................................................. 88 88 92 87 90

Female.............................................................. 88 95 90 87 89

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-20

Table C-8a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 2.1 2.9 2.2 2.2 1.7

300 to 499........................................................ 1.9 2.9 1.1 2.3 1.9

500 to 999........................................................ 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.2

1,000 or more .................................................. 0.9 1.0 0.7 1.0 0.9

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 1.9 1.4 1.1 1.7 1.4

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 1.2 1.3 1.0 1.2 1.4

Rural/small town............................................. 1.1 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.8

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 1.7 0.7 1.5 1.5 1.5

Midwest ........................................................... 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0

South................................................................ 0.8 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.2

West ................................................................. 1.7 2.5 1.4 1.9 1.2

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

6 to 20 percent................................................. 1.6 1.2 1.4 1.5 0.9

21 to 50 percent............................................... 1.1 2.6 1.4 1.6 1.9

More than 50 percent...................................... 1.9 1.7 0.9 2.2 1.7

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.0

15 to 32 percent............................................... 1.2 1.9 1.0 1.1 1.2

33 to 59 percent............................................... 1.4 1.8 1.5 2.4 1.8

60 percent or more .......................................... 1.9 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 1.7 2.8 1.7 1.8 1.6

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 2.1 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.5

10 to 19 years.................................................. 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.4

20 or more years.............................................. 1.1 1.1 0.8 1.1 1.0

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 1.7 # 3.3 3.6 2.9

Other ................................................................ 3.8 2.3 3.0 2.5 4.7

Sex

Male ................................................................. 1.1 2.2 0.8 0.9 0.8

Female.............................................................. 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.0

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-21

Table C-9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in in-service or

professional development activities of various lengths that focused on various topics,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

Uses of educational technology for instruction Methods of teaching your subject field

Total hours spent Total hours spent School and teacher characteristic

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 49 36 12 3 33 38 20 8

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 49 35 13 3 26 41 24 9

Middle school................................... 49 37 11 3 38 36 19 7

High school....................................... 48 37 12 3 44 34 15 6

Combined ......................................... 52 35 10 3 44 36 13 7

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 53 35 10 2 37 38 19 7

300 to 499......................................... 50 35 12 3 32 37 22 9

500 to 999......................................... 48 37 12 3 31 39 22 8

1,000 or more ................................... 48 36 12 4 40 36 17 8

Locale

Central city ....................................... 48 36 13 3 28 40 23 10

Urban fringe/large town................... 47 38 12 3 33 38 20 8

Rural/small town.............................. 51 35 11 3 37 37 19 7

Region

Northeast........................................... 57 30 11 2 37 37 18 7

Midwest ............................................ 52 36 9 3 39 38 17 6

South................................................. 45 38 14 4 30 40 22 8

West .................................................. 46 37 13 4 30 35 24 12

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 51 35 11 3 37 37 19 7

6 to 20 percent.................................. 45 39 13 3 35 37 20 8

21 to 50 percent................................ 48 36 12 4 32 40 20 8

More than 50 percent....................... 51 34 12 3 28 39 24 9

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 46 38 13 3 36 37 19 7

15 to 32 percent................................ 47 38 11 3 36 38 18 8

33 to 59 percent................................ 51 34 12 3 31 38 22 8

60 percent or more ........................... 52 32 13 3 30 40 23 8

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

......................... 50 36 12 3 26 41 24 9

Math/science..................................... 43 39 14 4 42 33 17 8

Other targeted academic subject ..... 53 34 11 3 40 37 17 7

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 54 32 11 2 32 36 22 10

4 to 9 years ....................................... 47 37 13 3 27 40 22 11

10 to 19 years................................... 47 37 12 4 31 38 22 8

20 or more years............................... 49 36 12 3 38 37 18 6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 50 36 12 3 34 38 20 8

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 44 38 13 4 27 43 23 7

Other ................................................. 47 34 14 4 28 35 23 13

Sex

Male .................................................. 48 37 12 3 45 35 15 6

Female............................................... 49 35 12 3 30 39 22 9
C-22

Table C-9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in in-service or

professional development activities of various lengths that focused on various topics,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 (continued)

In-depth study in your subject field Student assessment

Total hours spent Total hours spent School and teacher characteristic

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 71 14 9 6 45 43 10 3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 68 16 10 6 40 47 10 3

Middle school................................... 73 14 8 6 46 41 9 3

High school....................................... 74 12 8 7 53 36 8 2

Combined ......................................... 79 11 6 5 54 36 8 2

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 73 12 10 5 47 41 10 3

300 to 499......................................... 71 15 9 5 43 45 9 2

500 to 999......................................... 71 15 9 6 43 44 10 3

1,000 or more ................................... 72 13 8 7 51 37 9 3

Locale

Central city ....................................... 66 17 10 7 43 43 10 3

Urban fringe/large town................... 71 13 9 6 43 44 10 3

Rural/small town.............................. 74 13 8 5 48 41 9 2

Region

Northeast........................................... 73 13 8 5 47 42 9 3

Midwest ............................................ 75 13 7 5 50 40 8 3

South................................................. 70 16 9 5 45 43 9 2

West .................................................. 67 13 11 9 38 45 13 4

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 74 13 8 5 47 41 9 3

6 to 20 percent.................................. 72 14 10 5 45 43 10 3

21 to 50 percent................................ 70 14 9 6 46 43 9 2

More than 50 percent....................... 67 16 10 7 42 45 10 3

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 72 13 9 6 47 42 9 2

15 to 32 percent................................ 73 13 8 6 47 42 9 2

33 to 59 percent................................ 72 14 9 5 43 43 10 4

60 percent or more ........................... 69 15 9 7 43 44 10 2

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

......................... 69 16 10 5 40 47 10 3

Math/science..................................... 74 12 8 6 51 38 8 3

Other targeted academic subject ..... 72 13 8 6 49 38 10 3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 73 13 8 6 44 43 11 2

4 to 9 years ....................................... 70 13 11 7 43 42 11 3

10 to 19 years................................... 70 15 9 6 45 43 10 3

20 or more years............................... 73 15 8 5 47 42 8 2

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 72 14 9 6 46 42 9 3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 66 21 9 5 37 47 13 3

Other ................................................. 65 15 10 10 43 42 12 3

Sex

Male .................................................. 75 13 7 5 52 38 8 2

Female............................................... 70 15 10 6 43 44 10 3
C-23

Table C-9.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in in-service or

professional development activities of various lengths that focused on various topics,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 (continued)

Cooperative learning in the classroom

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More than 32

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 47 39 11 3

School instructional level

Elementary school........................................... 46 39 12 3

Middle school.................................................. 45 41 11 4

High school...................................................... 50 37 10 3

Combined ........................................................ 49 40 8 2

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 48 40 9 3

300 to 499........................................................ 48 38 11 2

500 to 999........................................................ 46 39 12 3

1,000 or more .................................................. 47 38 10 4

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 43 40 13 4

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 48 38 11 3

Rural/small town............................................. 49 39 10 2

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 48 37 11 4

Midwest ........................................................... 54 34 9 2

South................................................................ 40 44 12 3

West ................................................................. 51 36 11 3

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 50 38 10 3

6 to 20 percent................................................. 50 38 9 3

21 to 50 percent............................................... 46 40 12 3

More than 50 percent...................................... 41 41 14 4

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 49 38 10 3

15 to 32 percent............................................... 50 37 10 3

33 to 59 percent............................................... 45 40 11 3

60 percent or more .......................................... 44 40 13 3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

........................................ 46 39 12 3

Math/science.................................................... 47 40 10 4

Other targeted academic subject .................... 49 37 10 3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 47 39 12 3

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 47 38 12 3

10 to 19 years.................................................. 46 38 11 4

20 or more years.............................................. 48 40 10 3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 49 38 10 3

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 31 45 18 6

Other ................................................................ 37 42 15 6

Sex

Male ................................................................. 49 38 10 3

Female.............................................................. 46 39 12 3

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each type of professional development activity, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-24

Table C-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

in-service or professional development activities of various lengths that focused on

various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

Uses of educational technology for instruction Methods of teaching your subject field

Total hours spent Total hours spent School and teacher characteristic

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.5

Middle school................................... 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.5 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.7

High school....................................... 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3

Combined ......................................... 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.5

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.3 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.7

300 to 499......................................... 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.3 0.9 1.1 0.7 0.6

500 to 999......................................... 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.5

1,000 or more ................................... 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.6

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.3 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.1 1.1 0.6 0.3 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.6

Rural/small town.............................. 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4

Region

Northeast........................................... 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.3 1.1 1.3 1.1 0.7

Midwest ............................................ 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.5

South................................................. 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.4

West .................................................. 1.4 1.3 0.8 0.4 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.5

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.3 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.6

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.4 1.0 1.2 0.9 0.7

More than 50 percent....................... 1.5 1.4 0.8 0.4 1.2 1.3 1.0 0.7

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.4 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.6

15 to 32 percent................................ 1.1 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.5

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.8

60 percent or more ........................... 1.1 1.3 0.7 0.4 1.2 1.3 1.0 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

......................... 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.5

Math/science..................................... 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.3 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.5

Other targeted academic subject ..... 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.5 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.5

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.8

10 to 19 years................................... 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.5

20 or more years............................... 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 1.9 1.9 1.2 0.7 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.1

Other ................................................. 2.1 1.7 1.8 0.8 1.7 2.2 1.5 1.9

Sex

Male .................................................. 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.5

Female............................................... 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.4
C-25

Table C-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

in-service or professional development activities of various lengths that focused on

various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 (continued)

In-depth study in your subject field Student assessment

Total hours spent Total hours spent School and teacher characteristic

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More

than 32 0 1 to 8 9 to 32 Morethan 32

All targeted public school

teachers1.................................. 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.3

Middle school................................... 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.6 1.1 1.2 0.7 0.5

High school....................................... 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2

Combined ......................................... 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 1.3 1.2 0.4 0.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 1.2 0.7 0.7 0.6 1.3 1.3 0.9 0.3

300 to 499......................................... 1.1 0.7 0.7 0.5 1.1 1.2 0.6 0.3

500 to 999......................................... 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.3

1,000 or more ................................... 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.6 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.5

Urban fringe/large town................... 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.0 0.6 0.3

Rural/small town.............................. 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.2

Region

Northeast........................................... 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.5 1.4 1.4 0.9 0.4

Midwest ............................................ 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.3

South................................................. 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.2

West .................................................. 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.6 1.0 1.4 0.7 0.5

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.3

6 to 20 percent.................................. 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.4

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.4 1.3 0.8 0.3

More than 50 percent....................... 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.1 1.4 0.7 0.5

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.6 0.4

15 to 32 percent................................ 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.3

33 to 59 percent................................ 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.4 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.4

60 percent or more ........................... 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.7 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.3

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

......................... 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.3

Math/science..................................... 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.3

Other targeted academic subject ..... 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.7 1.3 1.5 0.9 0.3

4 to 9 years ....................................... 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.5 1.1 1.1 0.6 0.4

10 to 19 years................................... 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.4 1.1 1.0 0.5 0.4

20 or more years............................... 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 1.6 1.4 0.9 0.8 1.5 1.6 1.2 0.7

Other ................................................. 2.1 1.3 1.2 1.5 2.1 1.9 1.0 0.8

Sex

Male .................................................. 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.3

Female............................................... 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2
C-26

Table C-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

in-service or professional development activities of various lengths that focused on

various topics, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 (continued)

Cooperative learning in the classroom

School and teacher characteristic Total hours spent

0 1 to 8 9 to 32 More than 32

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2

School instructional level

Elementary school........................................... 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.3

Middle school.................................................. 1.4 1.3 0.8 0.5

High school...................................................... 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2

Combined ........................................................ 1.2 1.0 0.5 0.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 1.3 1.3 0.7 0.4

300 to 499........................................................ 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.3

500 to 999........................................................ 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.3

1,000 or more .................................................. 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.4

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 1.1 1.2 0.7 0.5

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.3

Rural/small town............................................. 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 1.5 1.3 0.8 0.5

Midwest ........................................................... 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3

South................................................................ 0.7 0.8 0.5 0.3

West ................................................................. 1.3 1.2 0.7 0.4

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3

6 to 20 percent................................................. 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.3

21 to 50 percent............................................... 1.2 1.2 0.6 0.5

More than 50 percent...................................... 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.5

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent .......................................

15 to 32 percent............................................... 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.3

33 to 59 percent............................................... 0.9 1.0 0.5 0.3

60 percent or more .......................................... 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.4

1.1 1.0 1.0 0.5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

........................................

Math/science.................................................... 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.3

Other targeted academic subject .................... 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.4

0.8 0.7 0.4 0.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years...............................................

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 1.3 1.3 0.8 0.5

10 to 19 years.................................................. 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.3

20 or more years.............................................. 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.3

0.9 0.9 0.5 0.3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 1.5 2.0 1.5 1.0

Other ................................................................ 2.1 2.5 1.6 1.2

Sex

Male ................................................................. 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3

Female.............................................................. 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.2

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-27

Table C-10.—Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program during their first year of teaching and percent of full-time public school

teachers who are currently a master or mentor teacher in a formal teacher induction

program, by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic

Participated in

induction program

during first year

Currently a master or

mentor teacher

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 28 12

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 29 12

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 29 13

High school.......................................................................................................................... 26 13

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 24 10

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 20 10

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 25 11

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 30 12

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 30 13

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 33 14

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 29 12

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 23 11

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 26 9

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 21 10

South.................................................................................................................................... 31 15

West ..................................................................................................................................... 31 11

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 22 11

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 26 11

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 30 13

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 36 14

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 24 12

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 25 12

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 29 13

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 33 12

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 29 11

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 27 12

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 26 13

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 59 3

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 47 10

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 17 14

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 16 14

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 26 11

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 39 19

Other .................................................................................................................................... 37 12

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 27 11

Female.................................................................................................................................. 28 12

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-28

Table C-10a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in a formal induction program during their first year of teaching and percent of

full-time public school teachers who are currently a master or mentor teacher in a

formal teacher induction program, by selected school and teacher characteristics:

1993-94

School and teacher characteristic

Participated in

induction program

during first year

Currently a master or

mentor teacher

All targeted public school teachers1.............................................................................. 0.6 0.4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 0.9 0.5

Middle school...................................................................................................................... 1.2 1.0

High school.......................................................................................................................... 0.4 0.4

Combined ............................................................................................................................ 0.9 0.6

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 1.2 1.0

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 1.0 0.6

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 0.9 0.5

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 0.9 0.6

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 1.2 0.8

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 1.0 0.6

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 0.7 0.5

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 1.4 0.9

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 0.9 0.5

South.................................................................................................................................... 0.8 0.6

West ..................................................................................................................................... 1.3 0.8

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 0.8 0.5

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 1.0 0.8

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 1.0 0.8

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 1.3 1.0

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 0.8 0.6

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 1.0 0.5

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 1.1 0.7

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 1.3 0.9

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2............................................................................................................ 0.9 0.6

Math/science........................................................................................................................ 0.8 0.7

Other targeted academic subject ........................................................................................ 0.7 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 1.5 0.5

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 1.4 0.8

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 0.7 0.7

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 0.6 0.5

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 0.6 0.4

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 2.1 1.5

Other .................................................................................................................................... 2.2 1.3

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 0.8 0.5

Female.................................................................................................................................. 0.7 0.4

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-29

Table C-11.—Average class size for full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94

Teaching assignment

School and teacher characteristic General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized

settings2

All targeted public school teachers3.............................................................................. 24 24

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 24 #

Middle school...................................................................................................................... # 25

High school.......................................................................................................................... # 23

Combined ............................................................................................................................ # 23

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 21 19

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 23 22

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 25 24

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 26 25

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 25 25

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 25 24

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 23 22

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 24 22

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 23 23

South.................................................................................................................................... 23 24

West ..................................................................................................................................... 27 26

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 23 23

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 24 23

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 24 24

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 24 25

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 24 24

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 24 23

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 24 24

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 24 24

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 24 24

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 24 24

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 24 23

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 24 24

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 24 24

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 24 25

Other .................................................................................................................................... 25 24

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 25 24

Female.................................................................................................................................. 24 23

#Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only; data for departmentalized settings are not reported for

elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was general elementary.

2The category labeled departmentalized settings includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment

was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

NOTE: Approximately 5 percent of the teachers were excluded from these SASS class size analyses, either because they taught “pull-out”

classes, where they provided instruction to students who were released from their regular classes (2 percent), or because of reporting problems in

their class size information (3 percent).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-30

Table C-11a.—Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in

general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

Teaching assignment

School and teacher characteristic General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized

settings2

All targeted public school teachers3.............................................................................. 0.1 0.1

School instructional level

Elementary school............................................................................................................... 0.1 #

Middle school...................................................................................................................... # 0.2

High school.......................................................................................................................... # 0.1

Combined ............................................................................................................................ # 0.2

School enrollment size

Less than 300....................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

300 to 499............................................................................................................................ 0.2 0.2

500 to 999............................................................................................................................ 0.1 0.1

1,000 or more ...................................................................................................................... 0.5 0.2

Locale

Central city .......................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Urban fringe/large town...................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

Rural/small town................................................................................................................. 0.1 0.1

Region

Northeast.............................................................................................................................. 0.3 0.2

Midwest ............................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

South.................................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

West ..................................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

More than 50 percent.......................................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

60 percent or more .............................................................................................................. 0.2 0.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.2

4 to 9 years .......................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

10 to 19 years...................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.2

20 or more years.................................................................................................................. 0.1 0.1

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

Black, non-Hispanic............................................................................................................ 0.4 2.4

Other .................................................................................................................................... 0.4 1.5

Sex

Male ..................................................................................................................................... 0.3 0.1

Female.................................................................................................................................. 0.1 0.1

#Data for general elementary classrooms are reported for elementary schools only; data for departmentalized settings are not reported for

elementary schools. Data for all school levels are included in the totals and in analyses by other school and teacher characteristics.

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was general elementary.

2The category labeled departmentalized settings includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment

was in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

NOTE: Approximately 5 percent of the teachers were excluded from these SASS class size analyses, either because they taught “pull-out”

classes, where they provided instruction to students who were released from their regular classes (2 percent), or because of reporting problems in

their class size information (3 percent).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-31

Table C-12.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94

The school administration’s behavior toward the

staff is supportive and encouraging

I receive a great deal of support from

parents for the work I do

School and teacher characteristic Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 41 38 14 7 11 42 30 17

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 44 36 12 7 15 46 26 13

Middle school................................... 41 37 14 8 8 37 34 21

High school....................................... 33 42 17 8 6 36 36 23

Combined ......................................... 36 39 16 8 7 38 34 21

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 40 39 14 7 13 43 30 13

300 to 499......................................... 42 38 14 7 12 44 28 16

500 to 999......................................... 43 37 13 7 12 42 30 16

1,000 or more ................................... 36 40 15 9 7 37 33 23

Locale

Central city ....................................... 42 35 14 9 11 37 31 21

Urban fringe/large town................... 41 38 14 7 13 44 28 15

Rural/small town.............................. 40 40 14 7 10 42 31 16

Region

Northeast........................................... 33 39 18 10 13 43 27 17

Midwest ............................................ 37 38 15 9 10 46 30 14

South................................................. 45 38 11 6 10 38 32 20

West .................................................. 45 37 13 6 12 43 28 17

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 38 39 15 8 11 46 29 14

6 to 20 percent.................................. 42 39 13 6 15 48 26 11

21 to 50 percent................................ 44 37 13 6 9 40 32 19

More than 50 percent....................... 40 37 14 9 9 30 34 27

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 38 40 15 8 15 48 27 11

15 to 32 percent................................ 42 38 14 7 11 44 30 16

33 to 59 percent................................ 43 38 12 7 9 41 31 19

60 percent or more ........................... 41 37 13 9 10 33 33 25

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

......................... 44 37 12 7 15 47 25 13

Math/science..................................... 36 40 16 8 7 36 35 22

Other targeted academic subject ..... 37 39 15 9 7 37 34 22

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 48 37 10 5 10 38 34 19

4 to 9 years ....................................... 40 38 14 8 10 38 31 20

10 to 19 years................................... 41 38 14 8 11 42 30 17

20 or more years............................... 38 39 15 8 12 44 28 15

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 40 38 14 7 11 42 30 17

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 47 33 10 9 18 36 27 19

Other ................................................. 39 41 12 8 12 42 30 17

Sex

Male .................................................. 36 41 15 8 8 38 34 20

Female............................................... 42 37 13 7 12 43 29 16
C-32

Table C-12.—Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94 (continued)

Goals and priorities for the school are clear

School and teacher characteristic

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 37 45 14 4

School instructional level

Elementary school........................................... 44 43 10 3

Middle school.................................................. 35 44 17 4

High school...................................................... 27 49 19 5

Combined ........................................................ 27 49 19 5

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 38 45 13 4

300 to 499........................................................ 42 43 11 4

500 to 999........................................................ 38 45 13 3

1,000 or more .................................................. 30 47 18 5

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 39 44 12 5

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 38 45 13 3

Rural/small town............................................. 35 46 15 4

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 34 44 17 5

Midwest ........................................................... 33 49 15 4

South................................................................ 44 43 11 3

West ................................................................. 33 48 16 4

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 34 47 15 4

6 to 20 percent................................................. 40 44 13 3

21 to 50 percent............................................... 40 45 12 3

More than 50 percent...................................... 38 43 14 5

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 35 47 14 3

15 to 32 percent............................................... 36 46 14 4

33 to 59 percent............................................... 40 44 12 3

60 percent or more .......................................... 39 43 13 5

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

........................................ 44 44 10 3

Math/science.................................................... 29 49 18 5

Other targeted academic subject .................... 32 46 17 5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 37 48 13 2

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 35 46 15 4

10 to 19 years.................................................. 40 43 13 4

20 or more years.............................................. 37 46 14 4

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 35 47 14 4

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 57 30 9 4

Other ................................................................ 41 43 12 4

Sex

Male ................................................................. 27 50 18 5

Female.............................................................. 41 43 12 3

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

NOTE: Percents are computed across each row for each statement, but may not sum to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
C-33

Table C-12a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or

disagreeing with selected statements about parent and school support for teachers,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

The school administration’s behavior toward the

staff is supportive and encouraging

I receive a great deal of support from

parents for the work I do

School and teacher characteristic Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

All targeted public school

teachers1

.................................. 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.4

School instructional level

Elementary school............................ 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.5

Middle school................................... 1.3 1.2 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.1 1.2 1.0

High school....................................... 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.6

Combined ......................................... 0.9 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.9 0.8

School enrollment size

Less than 300.................................... 1.4 1.7 1.0 0.6 1.0 1.3 1.4 0.9

300 to 499......................................... 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.8

500 to 999......................................... 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.6

1,000 or more ................................... 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.8

Locale

Central city ....................................... 1.3 1.2 0.7 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.8

Urban fringe/large town................... 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.6 1.1 0.8 0.7

Rural/small town.............................. 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.5

Region

Northeast........................................... 1.4 1.5 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.1

Midwest ............................................ 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.8

South................................................. 0.9 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5

West .................................................. 1.2 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.3 1.1 1.0

Percent minority enrollment in

school

5 percent or less................................ 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.5

6 to 20 percent.................................. 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.7

21 to 50 percent................................ 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.1 0.8

More than 50 percent....................... 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 1.1 1.0 1.0

Percent of students in school

eligible for free or reduced-price

school lunch

Less than 15 percent ........................ 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.6

15 to 32 percent................................ 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.7 0.7

33 to 59 percent................................ 1.2 1.3 0.7 0.6 0.7 1.1 1.0 0.8

60 percent or more ........................... 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.6 1.2 1.0 1.1

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

......................... 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.5

Math/science..................................... 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.8

Other targeted academic subject ..... 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years................................ 1.5 1.4 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.0

4 to 9 years ....................................... 1.0 1.1 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9

10 to 19 years................................... 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6

20 or more years............................... 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.6

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ........................ 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.4

Black, non-Hispanic......................... 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.6 1.3 1.9 1.6 1.4

Other ................................................. 2.1 1.8 1.1 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.2 1.5

Sex

Male .................................................. 0.8 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.7

Female............................................... 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.4
C-34

Table C-12a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or

disagreeing with selected statements about parent and school support for teachers,

by selected school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94 (continued)

Goals and priorities for the school are clear

School and teacher characteristic

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree

All targeted public school teachers1.......... 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2

School instructional level

Elementary school........................................... 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.3

Middle school.................................................. 1.3 1.3 1.0 0.5

High school...................................................... 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.2

Combined ........................................................ 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.4

School enrollment size

Less than 300................................................... 1.2 1.3 0.8 0.5

300 to 499........................................................ 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.3

500 to 999........................................................ 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.4

1,000 or more .................................................. 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.3

Locale

Central city ...................................................... 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.5

Urban fringe/large town.................................. 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.3

Rural/small town............................................. 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3

Region

Northeast.......................................................... 1.1 1.5 0.9 0.6

Midwest ........................................................... 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.4

South................................................................ 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.3

West ................................................................. 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.4

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less............................................... 0.6 0.8 0.5 0.3

6 to 20 percent................................................. 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.3

21 to 50 percent............................................... 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.3

More than 50 percent...................................... 1.2 0.9 0.9 0.7

Percent of students in school eligible for free

or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent ....................................... 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.3

15 to 32 percent............................................... 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.4

33 to 59 percent............................................... 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.3

60 percent or more .......................................... 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.7

Main teaching assignment

General elementary2

........................................ 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.3

Math/science.................................................... 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.4

Other targeted academic subject .................... 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.3

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years............................................... 1.8 1.8 0.9 0.3

4 to 9 years ...................................................... 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.6

10 to 19 years.................................................. 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.4

20 or more years.............................................. 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.3

Teacher race/ethnicity

White, non-Hispanic ....................................... 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.2

Black, non-Hispanic........................................ 2.1 1.8 1.1 1.3

Other ................................................................ 2.3 2.0 1.1 0.6

Sex

Male ................................................................. 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.4

Female.............................................................. 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.2

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

2The category labeled general elementary includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished

tabulations, 1998.
D-1

Appendix D

Standard Error Tables

for

Text Tables and Figures
D-2
D-3

Table of Contents

Standard Error Tables for Text Tables and Figures

Table Page

D-1a Standard errors of the percent of public school teachers who majored in various

fields of study for a bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 7

D-2a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who majored in

various fields of study for a bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94............................................................................. 8

D-3a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings with various types of teaching

certificates in their state: 1998............................................................................... 9

D-4a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings with various types of teaching

certificates in their state: 1993-94.......................................................................... 10

D-5a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1998 ........ 11

D-6a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1993-94 .. 12

D-7a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1998 ........ 13

D-8a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9

through 12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in

their main teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1993-94 .. 14

D-9a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities in the last 12 months in various content

areas, by teaching experience: 1998........................................................................ 15

D-10a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities since the end of the school year in various

content areas, by teaching experience: 1993-94 ..................................................... 16

D-11a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the

number of hours spent in professional development activities in the last 12 months

in various content areas: 1998 ................................................................................ 17

D-12a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the

number of hours spent in professional development activities since the end of the

last school year in various content areas: 1993-94.................................................. 18
D-4

Table of Contents (continued)

Standard Error Tables for Text Tables and Figures (continued)

Table Page

D-13a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their teaching: 1998 ................................ 19

D-14a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating that the

activity improved their teaching a lot, by teaching experience: 1998....................... 20

D-15a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the

extent to which participation in professional development activities in various

content areas improved their classroom teaching, by the number of hours spent in

professional development in that content area in the last 12 months: 1998 .............. 21

D-16a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in activities related to teaching in the last 12 months, by frequency of participation:

1998 ....................................................................................................................... 22

D-17a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated

in various activities related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their teaching: 1998 ................................ 23

D-18a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the

extent to which participation in activities related to teaching improved their

classroom teaching, by the frequency with which they participated in that activity in

the last 12 months: 1998......................................................................................... 24

D-19a Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in

general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

characteristics: 1998............................................................................................... 25

D-20a Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in

general elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

characteristics: 1993-94.......................................................................................... 26

D-21a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how

well prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom: 1998.................... 27

D-22a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they

feel very well prepared to do various activities in the classroom, by teaching

experience: 1998.................................................................................................... 28

D-23a Standard errors of the comparison of recent teacher participation in professional

development in various content areas and perceived teacher preparedness for

classroom requirements in those content areas: 1998 .............................................. 29

D-24a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how

well prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom, by the number of

hours spent in professional development in the content area of the activity in the

last 12 months: 1998 .............................................................................................. 30
D-5

Table of Contents (continued)

Standard Error Tables for Text Tables and Figures (continued)

Table Page

D-25a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they

feel very well prepared to do various classroom activities, by whether they

participated in various teaching-related activities in the last 12 months: 1998 .......... 31

D-26 Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and

SASS 1993-94 ........................................................................................................ 32

D-A-2a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers with any

undergraduate or graduate major in various fields of study, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998.................................................................................. 39

D-A-3a Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers with any

undergraduate or graduate major in various fields of study, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94............................................................................ 40
D-6
D-7

Table D-1a.—Standard errors of the percent of public school teachers who majored in various fields

of study for a bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1998

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.5

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 1.5 1.1 1.3 0.9

Middle school..................................................................................... 2.2 1.5 1.7 0.8

High school ........................................................................................ 1.2 1.3 0.7 0.2

Combined........................................................................................... 3.4 3.3 1.9 1.5

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 2.1 0.8 2.1 0.8

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 2.0 1.5 2.3 0.8

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 1.5 1.5 1.7 1.0

20 or more years................................................................................. 1.6 1.1 1.5 1.1

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-8

Table D-2a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who majored in

various fields of study for a bachelor’s or graduate degree, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 0.8 0.5 0.8 0.4

Middle school..................................................................................... 1.2 0.9 1.0 0.6

High school ........................................................................................ 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.1

Combined........................................................................................... 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.2

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 1.7 1.0 1.7 0.4

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 1.1 0.7 1.1 0.6

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.5

20 or more years................................................................................. 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.4

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations,

1998.
D-9

Table D-3a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in

their state: 1998

Teaching assignment

Type of teaching certificate General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized settings:

main teaching assignment

Regular or standard state certificate, or advanced professional certificate... 0.7 0.5

Provisional or other type of certificate given while participating in an

“alternative certification program”.......................................................... 0.4 0.3

Probationary certificate................................................................................ 0.3 0.3

Temporary certificate .................................................................................. 0.3 0.2

Emergency certificate or waiver.................................................................. 0.2 0.2

No certificate ............................................................................................... * 0.1

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of

instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-10

Table D-4a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary

classrooms and departmentalized settings with various types of teaching certificates in

their state: 1993-94

Teaching assignment

Type of teaching certificate General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized settings:

main teaching assignment2

Regular or standard state certificate, or advanced professional certificate... 0.5 0.4

Provisional or other type of certificate given while participating in an

“alternative certification program”.......................................................... 0.2 0.2

Probationary certificate................................................................................ 0.2 0.1

Temporary certificate .................................................................................. 0.2 0.1

Emergency certificate or waiver.................................................................. 0.1 0.1

No certificate ............................................................................................... 0.2 0.3

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was general elementary.

2The category labeled departmentalized settings includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-11

Table D-5a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social

studies/

social

science

Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1................... 1.4 1.3 1.6 2.1 1.8

Locale

Central city............................................................. 3.4 1.5 3.7 4.4 3.8

Urban fringe/town/rural.......................................... 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.6 1.5

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less.................................................... 1.5 1.4 2.0 2.2 1.7

More than 50 percent.............................................. 3.7 3.0 3.7 5.6 4.8

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent............................................... 1.3 1.3 1.9 2.1 1.8

60 percent or more.................................................. 5.0 # 4.4 6.4 6.0

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training, 1998.
D-12

Table D-6a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 7 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social

studies/

social

science

Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1................... 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.1

Locale

Central city............................................................. 2.1 1.2 1.4 2.2 1.9

Urban fringe/town/rural.......................................... 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.3

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less.................................................... 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.2

More than 50 percent.............................................. 2.6 1.4 1.8 2.8 2.8

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent............................................... 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.1

60 percent or more.................................................. 2.9 1.9 3.2 3.8 3.9

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations,

1998.
D-13

Table D-7a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1998

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social studies/

social science Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1......................... 1.0 1.5 1.2 2.0 1.4

Locale

Central city ..................................................................... 2.3 * 2.2 4.7 4.6

Urban fringe/town/rural................................................. 1.2 2.1 1.6 2.3 1.3

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less............................................................ 1.1 1.7 1.5 2.0 1.4

More than 50 percent..................................................... 2.5 # 2.3 6.3 3.7

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent ...................................................... 1.0 1.6 1.2 2.0 1.5

60 percent or more ......................................................... 4.0 # # 8.9 #

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

#Too few cases for a reliable estimate.

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-14

Table D-8a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers in grades 9 through

12 who reported having an undergraduate or graduate major or minor in their main

teaching assignment field, by selected school characteristics: 1993-94

School and teacher characteristic English/

language arts

Foreign

language

Social

studies/

social

science

Mathematics Science

All targeted public school teachers1................... 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6

Locale

Central city............................................................. 1.9 1.4 1.1 1.7 1.4

Urban fringe/town/rural.......................................... 0.7 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.8

Percent minority enrollment in school

50 percent or less.................................................... 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.7

More than 50 percent.............................................. 1.9 1.7 0.9 2.2 1.7

Percent of students in school eligible for free or

reduced-price school lunch

Less than 60 percent............................................... 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7

60 percent or more.................................................. 1.9 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.5

1Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations,

1998.
D-15

Table D-9a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities in the last 12 months in various content areas, by

teaching experience: 1998

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

State or district curriculum and performance standards.................................... 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.4

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach........... 1.8 1.9 1.5 1.3

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning) ...................................... 1.3 1.5 1.8 1.4

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment ............... 1.8 1.9 1.7 1.6

Student performance assessment....................................................................... 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.6

Classroom management, including student discipline....................................... 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.3

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities ............................................ 1.7 2.6 2.2 1.6

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds......................................................................... 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.4

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-16

Table D-10a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities since the end of the school year in various content

areas, by teaching experience: 1993-94

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

Methods of teaching your subject field................................................................ 1.2 0.9 0.9 0.7

Student assessment .............................................................................................. 1.3 1.1 1.1 0.6

Cooperative learning in the classroom................................................................. 1.3 1.1 0.8 0.9

Uses of educational technology for instruction.................................................... 1.5 1.2 0.9 0.9

In-depth study in your subject field ..................................................................... 1.3 0.9 0.9 0.7

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations,

1998.
D-17

Table D-11a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the

number of hours spent in professional development activities in the last 12 months in

various content areas: 1998

Total hours spent* Content area

1 to 8 More than 8

State or district curriculum and performance standards................................................................................... 1.1 1.1

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach.......................................................... 1.0 1.0

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning) ..................................................................................... 1.1 1.1

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment .............................................................. 0.8 0.8

Student performance assessment...................................................................................................................... 1.2 1.2

Classroom management, including student discipline...................................................................................... 1.2 1.2

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities ........................................................................................... 0.8 0.8

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds...... 1.5 1.5

*Estimates are based on those who participated in professional development activities in a particular content area.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-18

Table D-12a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the

number of hours spent in professional development activities since the end of the last

school year in various content areas: 1993-94

Total hours spent*

Content area

1 to 8 More than 8

Methods of teaching your subject field............................................................................................................ 0.6 0.6

Student assessment .......................................................................................................................................... 0.7 0.7

Cooperative learning in the classroom............................................................................................................. 0.7 0.7

Uses of educational technology for instruction................................................................................................ 0.6 0.6

In-depth study in your subject field ................................................................................................................. 0.9 0.9

*Estimates are based on those who participated in professional development activities in a particular content area.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations,

1998.
D-19

Table D-13a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating the extent to which

they believe the activity improved their teaching: 1998

Improved classroom teaching

Content area

A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

State or district curriculum and performance standards...................................... 0.6 1.1 1.1 0.7

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach............. 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning) ........................................ 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.4

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment ................. 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.3

Student performance assessment......................................................................... 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.6

Classroom management, including student discipline......................................... 1.1 1.2 1.3 0.8

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities .............................................. 0.9 1.6 1.6 0.6

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds........................................................................... 1.4 1.6 1.6 0.9

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-20

Table D-14a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

professional development activities in the last 12 months indicating that the activity

improved their teaching a lot, by teaching experience: 1998

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

State or district curriculum and performance standards.................................... 1.3 1.6 1.5 1.2

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach........... 1.8 1.9 1.6 1.8

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning) ...................................... 1.7 1.7 2.1 1.5

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment ............... 1.9 2.5 2.1 2.0

Student performance assessment....................................................................... 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.6

Classroom management, including student discipline....................................... 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.2

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities ............................................ 2.2 1.8 2.3 1.8

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds......................................................................... 2.3 3.1 2.5 2.5

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-21

Table D-15a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent

to which participation in professional development activities in various content areas

improved their classroom teaching, by the number of hours spent in professional

development in that content area in the last 12 months: 1998

Improved my teaching Content area

A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

State or district curriculum and performance standards

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 0.6 1.2 1.3 0.8

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.1

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 0.8 1.1 1.1 0.8

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 1.8 1.5 1.7 0.5

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 1.0 1.7 1.5 0.6

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 1.6 1.7 1.4 0.5

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 1.2 1.5 1.6 0.6

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 1.7 1.4 1.3 0.3

Student performance assessment

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 0.8 1.5 1.2 0.8

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 1.8 1.9 2.0 0.7

Classroom management, including student discipline

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 1.2 1.3 1.7 0.9

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 2.7 2.3 1.8 1.3

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 0.9 2.0 1.8 0.7

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 3.0 3.1 3.0 1.1

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from diverse

cultural backgrounds

1 to 8 hours............................................................................................................ 1.0 1.9 2.2 1.2

More than 8 hours................................................................................................. 3.5 3.1 2.3 1.4

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-22

Table D-16a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

activities related to teaching in the last 12 months, by frequency of participation: 1998

Frequency of participation*

Activity A few

times a

year

Once a

month

2 to 3

times a

month

At least

once a

week

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers..................................................... 1.1 1.0 0.8 1.1

Common planning period for team teachers...................................................................... 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.4

Networking with teachers outside your school.................................................................. 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.7

Individual or collaborative research on a topic of interest professionally ......................... 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.8

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship........................................................... 2.0 1.2 1.7 1.9

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship............................................. 2.3 1.2 1.6 1.8

*Estimates are based on those who participated in a particular activity related to teaching.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-23

Table D-17a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in

various activities related to teaching in the last 12 months indicating the extent to

which they believe the activity improved their teaching: 1998

Improved classroom teaching

Activity

A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers..................................... 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.5

Common planning period for team teachers...................................................... 1.5 1.1 1.1 0.5

Networking with teachers outside your school.................................................. 1.2 1.0 1.2 0.4

Individual or collaborative research on a topic of interest professionally ......... 1.2 1.1 1.2 0.3

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship........................................... 1.6 2.1 1.9 1.1

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship............................. 1.8 1.7 2.0 1.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-24

Table D-18a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent

to which participation in activities related to teaching improved their classroom

teaching, by the frequency with which they participated in that activity in the last 12

months: 1998

Improved my teaching Activity A lot Moderately Somewhat Not at all

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers, excluding meetings

held for administrative purposes

A few times a year......................................................................................... 1.8 1.7 2.1 1.4

Once a month ................................................................................................ 1.9 2.2 2.3 1.1

2 to 3 times a month...................................................................................... 2.1 2.5 2.5 0.9

At least once a week...................................................................................... 1.8 2.0 1.2 0.6

Common planning period for team teachers

A few times a year......................................................................................... 2.5 3.5 3.4 2.0

Once a month ................................................................................................ 3.8 4.7 4.1 2.3

2 to 3 times a month...................................................................................... 3.5 3.7 3.1 1.2

At least once a week...................................................................................... 1.7 1.4 1.2 0.4

Networking with teachers outside your school

A few times a year......................................................................................... 1.1 1.4 1.5 0.5

Once a month ................................................................................................ 2.8 2.5 2.4 0.9

2 to 3 times a month...................................................................................... 3.6 3.5 3.0 0.5

At least once a week...................................................................................... 3.7 3.5 2.7 1.5

Individual or collaborative research on a topic of interest to you

professionally

A few times a year......................................................................................... 1.7 1.7 2.2 0.4

Once a month ................................................................................................ 3.3 3.3 3.3 0.6

2 to 3 times a month...................................................................................... 2.4 3.1 2.5 1.0

At least once a week...................................................................................... 2.6 2.0 2.1 0.3

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship

A few times a year......................................................................................... 2.1 3.3 3.7 2.3

Once a month ................................................................................................ 4.6 4.5 5.1 4.3

2 to 3 times a month...................................................................................... 3.5 5.3 4.6 3.0

At least once a week...................................................................................... 2.6 3.0 2.8 2.0

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship

A few times a year......................................................................................... 2.1 2.6 3.3 2.2

Once a month ................................................................................................ 4.3 4.8 3.8 2.0

2 to 3 times a month...................................................................................... 4.5 4.0 3.8 *

At least once a week...................................................................................... 4.0 3.3 3.0 0.7

*Estimate of standard error is not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 0 or 100 percent.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-25

Table D-19a.—Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

characteristics: 1998

Teaching assignment

School characteristic General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized

settings

All targeted public school teachers2.............................................................. 0.2 0.1

Locale

Central city........................................................................................................ 0.2 0.3

Urban fringe/large town .................................................................................... 0.3 0.2

Rural/small town ............................................................................................... 0.3 0.2

Region

Northeast ........................................................................................................... 0.4 0.3

Midwest............................................................................................................. 0.3 0.3

South ................................................................................................................. 0.2 0.2

West .................................................................................................................. 0.3 0.4

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less................................................................................................. 0.4 0.2

6 to 20 percent................................................................................................... 0.3 0.2

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................. 0.3 0.3

More than 50 percent......................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent.......................................................................................... 0.3 0.3

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................. 0.4 0.3

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................. 0.2 0.3

60 percent or more............................................................................................. 0.3 0.4

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes all teachers of self-contained classrooms in the 1998 FRSS study, regardless of

instructional level. Almost all (95 percent) of the self-contained classrooms were at the elementary school level.

2Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-26

Table D-20a.—Standard errors of the average class size for full-time public school teachers in general

elementary classrooms and departmentalized settings, by selected school

characteristics: 1993-94

Teaching assignment

School characteristic General elementary

classrooms1

Departmentalized

settings2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................................ 0.1 0.1

Locale

Central city.......................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Urban fringe/large town ...................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

Rural/small town ................................................................................................. 0.1 0.1

Region

Northeast ............................................................................................................. 0.3 0.2

Midwest............................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

South ................................................................................................................... 0.1 0.1

West .................................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

Percent minority enrollment in school

5 percent or less...................................................................................................

6 to 20 percent..................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

21 to 50 percent................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

More than 50 percent........................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

0.3 0.3

Percent of students in school eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch

Less than 15 percent............................................................................................ 0.2 0.1

15 to 32 percent................................................................................................... 0.2 0.1

33 to 59 percent................................................................................................... 0.2 0.2

60 percent or more............................................................................................... 0.2 0.3

1The category labeled general elementary classrooms includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching

assignment was general elementary.

2The category labeled departmentalized settings includes teachers in the 1993-94 SASS study who indicated that their main teaching assignment was

in English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign language, mathematics, or science.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

NOTE: Approximately 5 percent of the teachers were excluded from these SASS class size analyses, either because they taught “pull-out” classes,

where they provided instruction to students who were released from their regular classes (2 percent), or because of reporting problems in their class

size information (3 percent).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations,

1998.
D-27

Table D-21a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well

prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom: 1998

How well prepared teachers feel

Activity Very well

prepared

Moderately

well

prepared

Somewhat

well

prepared

Not at all

prepared

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom............................................ 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.2

Implement new methods for teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)............... 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.3

Implement state or district curriculum and performance standards.............. 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.3

Use student performance assessment techniques ......................................... 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.4

Address the needs of students with disabilities* .......................................... 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.6

Integrate educational technology into the grade or subject taught................ 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.5

Address the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds*.................................................................. 1.1 1.4 1.0 0.9

*Estimates are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-28

Table D-22a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel

very well prepared to do various activities in the classroom, by teaching experience:

1998

Teaching experience

Content area 3 or fewer

years

4 to 9

years

10 to 19

years

20 or more

years

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom............................................ 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.2

Implement new methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)................ 2.0 1.8 1.9 1.8

Implement state or district curriculum and performance standards.............. 1.9 1.7 2.0 1.7

Use student performance assessment techniques ......................................... 1.7 1.5 1.7 1.5

Address the needs of students with disabilities* .......................................... 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.6

Integrate educational technology into the grade or subject taught................ 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.4

Address the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds*.................................................................. 1.1 1.4 1.0 0.9

*Estimates are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-29

Table D-23a.—Standard errors of the comparison of recent teacher participation in professional

development in various content areas and perceived teacher preparedness for

classroom requirements in those content areas: 1998

Activity

Percent of teachers

indicating they

participated in

professional

development activities

Percent of all teachers

indicating they felt very

well prepared for the

classroom activity

Of the teachers who

participated in

professional

development, percent

indicating they felt very

well prepared for the

classroom activity

Maintain order and discipline in the classroom .................. 0.9 0.7 1.3

Implement new teaching methods ...................................... 0.7 0.8 1.0

Implement state or district curriculum and performance

standards ........................................................................ 0.8 0.9 1.0

Use student performance assessment techniques................ 0.9 1.0 1.2

Address the needs of students with disabilities................... 1.1 0.8 1.3

Integrate educational technology into the grade or

subject taught ................................................................. 0.8 0.8 0.9

Address the needs of students with limited English

proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds.......... 1.1 1.1 1.8

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-30

Table D-24a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating how well

prepared they feel to do various activities in the classroom, by the number of hours

spent in professional development in the content area of the activity in the last 12

months: 1998

Content area Very well

prepared

Moderately

well

prepared

Somewhat

well

prepared

Not at all

prepared

State or district curriculum and performance standards

0 hours .............................................................................................................. 2.2 2.2 1.8 1.0

1 to 8 hours ....................................................................................................... 1.2 1.4 1.4 0.5

More than 8 hours............................................................................................. 1.9 1.9 1.5 0.3

Integration of educational technology into the grade or subject taught

0 hours .............................................................................................................. 1.1 1.4 2.0 1.7

1 to 8 hours ....................................................................................................... 0.8 1.3 1.2 0.6

More than 8 hours............................................................................................. 1.9 1.9 1.6 0.5

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)

0 hours .............................................................................................................. 1.7 1.9 1.5 0.9

1 to 8 hours ....................................................................................................... 1.3 1.3 1.0 0.3

More than 8 hours............................................................................................. 1.7 1.6 0.9 0.1

Student performance assessment

0 hours .............................................................................................................. 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.1

1 to 8 hours ....................................................................................................... 1.1 1.4 1.2 0.4

More than 8 hours............................................................................................. 2.3 1.9 1.3 0.6

Classroom management, including student discipline

0 hours .............................................................................................................. 1.2 1.1 0.5 0.2

1 to 8 hours ....................................................................................................... 1.4 1.3 0.6 0.3

More than 8 hours............................................................................................. 2.8 2.5 1.0 0.3

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities1

0 hours .............................................................................................................. 1.0 1.8 1.4 1.1

1 to 8 hours ....................................................................................................... 1.4 1.7 1.3 0.8

More than 8 hours............................................................................................. 3.6 3.0 2.6 0.9

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds1

0 hours .............................................................................................................. 1.1 1.8 1.5 1.6

1 to 8 hours ....................................................................................................... 1.8 2.2 1.9 1.0

More than 8 hours............................................................................................. 3.5 3.1 2.4 0.6

1Estimates are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-31

Table D-25a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel

very well prepared to do various classroom activities, by whether they participated in

various teaching-related activities in the last 12 months: 1998

Feel very well prepared to:

Whether teacher

participated in the activity

Maintain

order and

discipline in

the classroom

Implement

new methods

of teaching

Implement

state or

district

curriculum

and

performance

standards

Use student

performance

assessment

techniques

Address the

needs of

students with

disabilities1

Integrate

educational

technology

into the grade

or subject

taught

Address the

needs of

students with

limited

English

proficiency or

from diverse

cultural

backgrounds1

Common planning period

for team teachers

Yes.................................... 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.3

No ..................................... 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.1 1.9

Regularly scheduled

collaboration with other

teachers, excluding

meetings held for

administrative purposes

Yes.................................... 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2

No ..................................... 1.9 1.8 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.4 2.2

Being mentored by another

teacher in a formal

relationship

Yes.................................... 1.9 1.9 2.1 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.7

No ..................................... 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.2

Mentoring another teacher

in a formal relationship

Yes.................................... 1.5 1.9 1.7 2.2 2.1 1.8 2.0

No ..................................... 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.1 0.8 0.9 1.1

Networking with teachers

outside your school

Yes.................................... 1.0 1.3 1.0 1.3 1.0 1.1 1.4

No ..................................... 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.6

Individual or collaborative

research on a topic of

interest to you

professionally

Yes.................................... 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.5

No ..................................... 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.7

1Estimates are based on teachers who teach students with these characteristics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-32

Table D-26.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and SASS

1993-94

Item Estimate

Standard

error

Figure 1: Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold master’s degree, by selected

school and teacher characteristics

School level: elementary school ............................................................................................................. 40 1.8

School level: middle school.................................................................................................................... 46 1.9

School level: high school........................................................................................................................ 55 1.5

School level: combined .......................................................................................................................... 49 3.7

Teaching experience: less than 3 years................................................................................................... 16 1.6

Teaching experience: 4 to 9 years........................................................................................................... 31 2.3

Teaching experience: 10 to 19 years....................................................................................................... 48 1.8

Teaching experience: 20 or more years .................................................................................................. 62 1.5

Free or reduced-price lunch: less than 15 percent................................................................................... 57 1.8

Free or reduced-price lunch: 15 to 32 percent ........................................................................................ 46 2.0

Free or reduced-price lunch: 33 to 59 percent ........................................................................................ 41 2.4

Free or reduced-price lunch: 60 percent or more .................................................................................... 37 2.3

Region: Northeast................................................................................................................................... 60 2.8

Region: Midwest .................................................................................................................................... 51 2.0

Region: South......................................................................................................................................... 39 1.6

Region: West .......................................................................................................................................... 38 2.0

Figure 2: Percent of full-time public school teachers who hold master’s degree, by selected

school and teacher characteristics: 1993-94

School level: elementary school ............................................................................................................. 42 0.7

School level: middle school.................................................................................................................... 46 1.4

School level: high school........................................................................................................................ 55 0.7

School level: combined .......................................................................................................................... 47 0.8

Teaching experience: less than 3 years................................................................................................... 15 1.0

Teaching experience: 4 to 9 years........................................................................................................... 30 1.1

Teaching experience: 10 to 19 years....................................................................................................... 49 1.1

Teaching experience: 20 or more years .................................................................................................. 61 0.9

Free or reduced-price lunch: less than 15 percent................................................................................... 53 1.0

Free or reduced-price lunch: 15 to 32 percent ........................................................................................ 46 0.9

Free or reduced-price lunch: 33 to 59 percent 41 1.0

Free or reduced-price lunch: 60 percent or more 41 1.2

Region: Northeast................................................................................................................................... 60 1.1

Region: Midwest .................................................................................................................................... 47 1.2

Region: South......................................................................................................................................... 42 0.7

Region: West .......................................................................................................................................... 37 1.2

Figure 3: Percent of full-time public school teachers in general elementary classrooms and

departmentalized settings with a regular or standard state certificate or advanced professional

certificate, by teaching experience

General elementary classrooms: 3 or fewer years................................................................................... 65 3.1

General elementary classrooms: 4 to 9 years.......................................................................................... 92 1.6

General elementary classrooms: 10 to 19 years...................................................................................... 99 0.6

General elementary classrooms: 20 or more years.................................................................................. 99 0.5

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 3 or fewer years................................................ 64 2.3

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 4 to 9 years ....................................................... 89 1.5

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 10 to 19 years.................................................... 97 0.7

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 20 or more years............................................... 99 0.4
D-33

Table D-26.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and SASS

1993-94 (continued)

Item Estimate

Standard

error

Figure 4: Percent of full-time classroom and departmentalized teachers in public schools with a

regular or standard state certificate or advanced professional certificate, by teaching

experience: 1993-94

General elementary classrooms: 3 or fewer years................................................................................... 73 2.8

General elementary classrooms: 4 to 9 years.......................................................................................... 92 0.9

General elementary classrooms: 10 to 19 years...................................................................................... 97 0.6

Self-contained: 20 or more years............................................................................................................ 99 0.4

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 3 or fewer years................................................ 66 1.5

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 4 to 9 years ....................................................... 86 1.2

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 10 to 19 years.................................................... 94 0.6

Departmentalized setting: Main teaching assignment: 20 or more years............................................... 96 0.4

Figure 5: Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months that focused on various topics: 1998

State or district curriculum and performance standards.......................................................................... 81 0.8

Integration of educational technology in the grade or subject you teach ................................................ 78 0.8

New methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative learning)............................................................................ 77 0.7

In-depth study in the subject area of your main teaching assignment..................................................... 73 0.8

Student performance assessment ............................................................................................................ 67 0.9

Classroom management, including student discipline ............................................................................ 49 0.9

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities.................................................................................. 48 1.1

Addressing the needs of students with limited English proficiency or from diverse cultural

backgrounds....................................................................................................................................... 31 1.1

Figure 6: Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities since the end of the last school year that focused on various topics:

1993-94

Methods of teaching your subject field................................................................................................... 67 0.4

Student assessment ................................................................................................................................. 55 0.5

Cooperative learning in the classroom.................................................................................................... 53 0.5

Uses of educational technology for instruction....................................................................................... 51 0.6

In-depth study in your subject field ........................................................................................................ 29 0.4

Figure 7: Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months that addressed the needs of students with limited

English proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds, by percent of minority enrollment in

the school: 1998

Percent minority enrollment: 5 percent or less........................................................................................ 14 1.5

Percent minority enrollment: 6 to 20 percent.......................................................................................... 29 1.9

Percent minority enrollment: 21 to 50 percent........................................................................................ 34 2.0

Percent minority enrollment: more than 50 percent................................................................................ 51 2.5

Figure 8: Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in professional

development activities in the last 12 months that addressed the needs of students with limited

English proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds, by region: 1998

Northeast ................................................................................................................................................ 22 2.2

Midwest.................................................................................................................................................. 22 1.9

South ...................................................................................................................................................... 33 1.7

West........................................................................................................................................................ 51 2.4
D-34

Table D-26.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and SASS

1993-94 (continued)

Item Estimate

Standard

error

Figure 9: Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in various activities

related to teaching in the last 12 months: 1998

Regularly scheduled collaboration with other teachers........................................................................... 81 0.9

Common planning period for team teachers........................................................................................... 62 0.9

Networking with teachers outside the school.......................................................................................... 61 0.9

Individual or collaborative research........................................................................................................ 53 0.9

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship ................................................................................ 26 0.8

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship................................................................... 19 0.6

Figure 10: Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in mentoring activities in

the last 12 months, by teaching experience: 1998

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship: 3 or fewer years....................................... 58 1.8

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship: 4 to 9 years.............................................. 21 1.7

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship: 10 to 19 years.......................................... 12 1.4

Being mentored by another teacher in a formal relationship: 20 or more years...................................... 9 0.8

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship: 3 or fewer years..................................................... 12 1.3

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship: 4 to 9 years............................................................ 25 2.0

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship: 10 to 19 years........................................................ 32 1.8

Mentoring another teacher in a formal relationship: 20 or more years ................................................... 27 1.2

Figure 11: Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the extent to which being

mentored improved their classroom teaching, by teaching experience: 1998

Improved a lot: 3 or fewer years............................................................................................................. 45 2.4

Improved a lot: 4 to 9 years.................................................................................................................... 31 4.4

Improved a lot: 10 to 19 years................................................................................................................ 32 4.5

Improved a lot: 20 or more years............................................................................................................ 18 4.3

Improved moderately: 3 or fewer years.................................................................................................. 26 1.9

Improved moderately: 4 to 9 years ......................................................................................................... 26 3.6

Improved moderately: 10 to 19 years ..................................................................................................... 28 4.8

Improved moderately: 20 or more years................................................................................................. 27 5.2

Improved somewhat: 3 or fewer years.................................................................................................... 25 2.2

Improved somewhat: 4 to 9 years........................................................................................................... 36 4.6

Improved somewhat: 10 to 19 years....................................................................................................... 35 5.0

Improved somewhat: 20 or more years................................................................................................... 39 5.1

Improved not at all: 3 or fewer years...................................................................................................... 5 1.0

Improved not at all: 4 to 9 years............................................................................................................. 8 1.8

Improved not at all: 10 to 19 years ......................................................................................................... 5 2.8

Improved not at all: 20 or more years..................................................................................................... 15 4.3

Figure 12: Percent of full-time public school teachers who participated in a formal induction

program when they first began teaching, by teaching experience: 1998

3 or fewer years...................................................................................................................................... 65 1.9

4 to 9 years ............................................................................................................................................. 55 2.1

10 to 19 years ......................................................................................................................................... 28 1.7

20 or more years..................................................................................................................................... 14 1.1

Figure 13: Percent of public school teachers who participated in a formal induction program

during their first year of teaching, by teaching experience: 1993-94

3 or fewer years...................................................................................................................................... 59 1.5

4 to 9 years ............................................................................................................................................. 47 1.4

10 to 19 years ......................................................................................................................................... 17 0.7

20 or more years..................................................................................................................................... 16 0.6
D-35

Table D-26.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and SASS

1993-94 (continued)

Item Estimate

Standard

error

Figure 14: Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating the length of the formal

induction program in which they participated when they first began teaching: 1998

Length of program: 3 months or less....................................................................................................... 12 1.0

Length of program: more than 3 to 8 months .......................................................................................... 10 0.9

Length of program: 9 months to 1 year.................................................................................................... 66 1.5

Length of program: more than a year ...................................................................................................... 12 1.0

Figure 15: Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers: 1998

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: strongly agree ........................................ 63 0.9

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: somewhat agree ..................................... 33 0.9

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: somewhat disagree ............................... 4 0.3

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: strongly disagree.................................... 1 0.1

The school administration supports me in my work: strongly agree....................................................... 55 1.1

The school administration supports me in my work: somewhat agree.................................................... 36 1.0

The school administration supports me in my work: somewhat disagree ............................................... 7 0.5

The school administration supports me in my work: strongly disagree .................................................. 2 0.3

School goals and priorities are clear: strongly agree............................................................................... 47 1.1

School goals and priorities are clear: somewhat agree............................................................................ 38 1.0

School goals and priorities are clear: somewhat disagree ...................................................................... 11 0.6

School goals and priorities are clear: strongly disagree .......................................................................... 4 0.4

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: strongly agree............................................. 32 1.1

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: somewhat agree.......................................... 54 1.1

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: somewhat disagree ..................................... 11 0.6

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: strongly disagree ........................................ 3 0.3

Figure 16: Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers: 1993-94

The school administration behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: strongly agree ..... 41 0.5

The school administration behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: somewhat agree .. 38 0.5

The school administration behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: somewhat

disagree ............................................................................................................................................... 14 0.3

The school administration behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: strongly disagree. 7 0.3

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: strongly agree ................................................................... 37 0.5

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: somewhat agree ................................................................ 45 0.4

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: somewhat disagree ........................................................... 14 0.4

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: strongly disagree............................................................... 4 0.2

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: strongly agree..................................... 11 0.3

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: somewhat agree.................................. 42 0.5

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: somewhat disagree ............................. 30 0.4

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: strongly disagree ................................ 17 0.4
D-36

Table D-26.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and SASS

1993-94 (continued)

Item Estimate

Standard

error

Figure 17: Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by school instructional level: 1998

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: elementary school................................. 69 1.5

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: middle school ........................................ 60 1.8

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: high school ............................................ 53 1.5

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: combined school.................................... 49 3.8

The school administration supports me in my work: elementary school................................................. 56 1.9

The school administration supports me in my work: middle school ....................................................... 59 1.6

The school administration supports me in my work: high school........................................................... 49 1.7

The school administration supports me in my work: combined school .................................................. 48 3.8

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: elementary school............................................................ 52 1.7

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: middle school .................................................................. 48 1.5

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: high school ...................................................................... 37 1.6

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: combined ......................................................................... 32 3.6

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: elementary school ..................................... 36 1.7

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: middle school............................................ 30 1.6

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: high school................................................ 24 1.4

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: combined ................................................... 25 3.3

Figure 18: Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by school instructional level: 1993-94

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: elementary

school ................................................................................................................................................. 44 0.8

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: middle school... 41 1.3

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: high school....... 33 0.6

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: combined ......... 36 0.9

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: elementary school............................................................. 44 0.7

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: middle school ................................................................... 35 1.3

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: high school ....................................................................... 27 0.6

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: combined.......................................................................... 27 1.0

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: elementary school .............................. 15 0.6

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: middle school..................................... 8 0.7

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: high school......................................... 6 0.3

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: combined............................................ 7 0.4

Figure 19: Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by teaching experience: 1998

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: 3 or fewer years..................................... 67 1.6

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: 4 to 9 years ............................................. 66 1.6

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: 10 to 19 years ......................................... 62 1.9

Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my work: 20 or more years..................................... 60 1.4

The school administration supports me in my work: 3 or fewer years.................................................... 60 2.6

The school administration supports me in my work: 4 to 9 years............................................................ 56 2.0

The school administration supports me in my work: 10 to 19 years........................................................ 53 2.1

The school administration supports me in my work: 20 or more years.................................................... 52 1.4

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 3 or fewer years................................................................ 46 2.8

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 4 to 9 years........................................................................ 46 2.0

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 10 to 19 years.................................................................... 48 2.0

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 20 or more years................................................................ 48 1.6

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: 3 or fewer years .......................................... 26 1.7

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: 4 to 9 years.................................................. 32 2.1

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: 10 to 19 years.............................................. 32 2.0

Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children: 20 or more years ......................................... 33 1.6
D-37

Table D-26.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and SASS

1993-94 (continued)

Item Estimate

Standard

error

Figure 20: Percent of full-time public school teachers who strongly agreed with selected

statements about parent and school support for teachers, by teaching experience: 1993-94

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: 3 or fewer years 48 1.5

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: 4 to 9 years........ 40 1.0

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: 10 to 19 years... 41 0.8

The school administrations’ behavior toward the staff is supportive and encouraging: 20 or more years 38 0.9

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 3 or fewer years................................................................. 37 1.8

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 4 to 9 years........................................................................ 35 0.9

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 10 to 19 years.................................................................... 40 0.9

Goals and priorities for the school are clear: 20 or more years................................................................ 37 0.8

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: 3 or fewer years................................... 10 1.0

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: 4 to 9 years.......................................... 10 0.7

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: 10 to 19 years...................................... 11 0.7

I receive a great deal of support from parents for the work I do: 20 or more years.................................. 12 0.5

Figure 21: Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing that parents

support them in their efforts to educate their children, by percent of students in school eligible

for free or reduced-price school lunch: 1998

Less than 15 percent: strongly agree....................................................................................................... 41 1.9

Less than 15 percent: somewhat agree.................................................................................................... 53 2.0

Less than 15 percent: somewhat disagree ............................................................................................... 5 0.5

Less than 15 percent: strongly disagree .................................................................................................. 1 0.4

15 to 32 percent: strongly agree.............................................................................................................. 34 2.0

15 to 32 percent: somewhat agree........................................................................................................... 56 1.8

15 to 32 percent: somewhat disagree ...................................................................................................... 9 1.0

15 to 32 percent: strongly disagree ......................................................................................................... 1 0.4

33 to 59 percent: strongly agree.............................................................................................................. 29 2.2

33 to 59 percent: somewhat agree........................................................................................................... 57 2.1

33 to 59 percent: somewhat disagree ...................................................................................................... 11 1.2

33 to 59 percent: strongly disagree ......................................................................................................... 3 0.8

60 percent or more: strongly agree ......................................................................................................... 23 1.8

60 percent or more: somewhat agree ...................................................................................................... 53 2.2

60 percent or more: somewhat disagree.................................................................................................. 17 1.7

60 percent or more: strongly disagree..................................................................................................... 7 0.9

Figure 22: Percent of full-time public school teachers agreeing or disagreeing that they receive a

great deal of support from parents for the work they do, by percent of students in school eligible

for free or reduced-price school lunch: 1993-94

Less than 15 percent: strongly agree....................................................................................................... 15 0.7

Less than 15 percent: somewhat agree.................................................................................................... 48 0.9

Less than 15 percent: somewhat disagree ............................................................................................... 27 0.9

Less than 15 percent: strongly disagree .................................................................................................. 11 0.6

15 to 32 percent: strongly agree.............................................................................................................. 11 0.6

15 to 32 percent: somewhat agree........................................................................................................... 44 0.9

15 to 32 percent: somewhat disagree ...................................................................................................... 30 0.7

15 to 32 percent: strongly disagree ......................................................................................................... 16 0.7

33 to 59 percent: strongly agree.............................................................................................................. 9 0.7

33 to 59 percent: somewhat agree........................................................................................................... 41 1.1

33 to 59 percent: somewhat disagree ...................................................................................................... 31 1.0

33 to 59 percent: strongly disagree ......................................................................................................... 19 0.8

60 percent or more: strongly agree ......................................................................................................... 10 0.6

60 percent or more: somewhat agree ...................................................................................................... 33 1.2

60 percent or more: somewhat disagree.................................................................................................. 33 1.0

60 percent or more: strongly disagree..................................................................................................... 25 1.1
D-38

Table D-26.—Standard errors for the figures and for data not shown in tables: FRSS 1998 and SASS

1993-94 (continued)

Item Estimate

Standard

error

Figure 23: Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well or

moderately well prepared to address the needs of students with limited English proficiency or

from diverse cultural backgrounds, by percent minority enrollment in the school: 1998

5 percent or less: very well prepared ...................................................................................................... 10 2.0

5 percent or less: moderately well prepared............................................................................................ 25 2.9

6 to 20 percent: very well prepared......................................................................................................... 15 1.9

6 to 20 percent: moderately well prepared.............................................................................................. 33 2.6

21 to 50 percent: very well prepared....................................................................................................... 20 1.9

21 to 50 percent: moderately well prepared............................................................................................ 34 2.5

More than 50 percent: very well prepared .............................................................................................. 27 2.4

More than 50 percent: moderately well prepared.................................................................................... 37 2.4

Figure 24: Percent of full-time public school teachers indicating they feel very well prepared to

do various classroom activities, by whether they participated in professional development

activities in the last 12 months that focused on these content areas: 1998

Maintain order/discipline in the classroom: participated ......................................................................... 68 1.3

Maintain order/discipline in the classroom: did not participate ............................................................... 74 1.3

New methods of teaching: participated.................................................................................................... 43 1.0

New methods of teaching: did not participate.......................................................................................... 34 1.7

State/district curriculum and performance standards: participated .......................................................... 38 1.0

State/district curriculum and performance standards: did not participate ................................................ 20 2.3

Student performance assessment: participated......................................................................................... 33 1.2

Student performance assessment: did not participate............................................................................... 20 1.2

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities: participated ............................................................. 25 1.3

Addressing the needs of students with disabilities: did not participate .................................................... 17 1.0

Integration of educational technology: participated................................................................................. 23 0.9

Integration of educational technology: did not participate....................................................................... 11 1.1

Addressing the needs of limited English students: participated............................................................... 28 1.8

Addressing the needs of limited English students: did not participate ..................................................... 14 1.1

Chapter 2, section on teacher certification

Percent of teachers in 1998 with 3 or fewer years of teaching experience that had emergency or

temporary certification ............................................................................................................................ 12 2.3

Percent of teachers in 1998 with 10 or more years of teaching experience that had emergency or

temporary certification ............................................................................................................................ 0.1 0.1

Chapter 3, section on formal professional development

Percent of teachers in 1998 that had participated in professional development programs in at least one

of the listed content areas ........................................................................................................................ 99 0.2

Percent of teachers in 1993-94 that had participated in professional development programs in at least

one of the listed content areas.................................................................................................................. 90 0.3

Chapter 3, section on participation in collaborative activities

Percent of teachers in 1998 that had participated in at least one of the listed collaborative activities...... 95 0.4

Chapter 5, section on teachers’ preparedness for classroom requirements

Percent of teachers in 1998 that taught limited English proficient or culturally diverse students............ 54 1.3

Percent of teachers in 1998 that taught students with disabilities............................................................ 71 0.9
D-39

Table D-A-2a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers with any undergraduate or graduate major in various fields of study, by selected school and

teacher characteristics: 1998

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.6

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.0

Middle school..................................................................................... 2.2 1.6 2.3 1.1

High school ........................................................................................ 1.3 1.5 1.2 1.1

Combined........................................................................................... 3.4 3.0 3.8 2.4

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 2.1 1.2 2.2 1.1

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 2.0 1.8 2.2 1.2

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.3

20 or more years................................................................................. 1.6 1.0 1.5 1.3

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, or science, or who taught a self-contained classroom.

NOTE: Estimates are duplicated. That is, teachers with more than one major or more than one degree are counted for each field of study in which

they have a major or degree.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System, Teacher Survey on Professional

Development and Training, 1998.
D-40

Table D-A-3a.—Standard errors of the percent of full-time public school teachers with any undergraduate or graduate major in various fields of study, by selected school and teacher

characteristics: 1993-94

School characteristic Academic

field

Subject area

education1

General

education

Other

education2

All targeted public school teachers3................................................... 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3

School instructional level

Elementary school.............................................................................. 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.5

Middle school..................................................................................... 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.0

High school ........................................................................................ 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4

Combined........................................................................................... 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.6

Teaching experience

3 or fewer years.................................................................................. 1.7 0.9 1.7 0.5

4 to 9 years......................................................................................... 1.1 0.8 1.1 0.7

10 to 19 years..................................................................................... 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.6

20 or more years................................................................................. 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5

1

Subject area education is the teaching of an academic field, such as mathematics education.

2Examples of other education fields are special education, curriculum and instruction, and educational administration.

3Targeted public school teachers were full-time public school teachers in grades 1 through 12 whose main teaching assignment was in

English/language arts, social studies/social sciences, foreign languages, mathematics, science, or general elementary.

NOTE: Estimates are duplicated. That is, teachers with more than one major or more than one degree are counted for each field of study in which

they have a major or degree.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993-94 Schools and Staffing Survey, unpublished tabulations,

1998.
E-1

Appendix E

1998 Teacher Survey on

Professional Development and Training

Fast Response Survey System Questionnaire
E-2
E-3

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FORM APPROVED

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS O.M.B. No.: 1850-0733

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20208-5651 EXPIRATION DATE: 07/99

TEACHER SURVEY ON

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING

FAST RESPONSE SURVEY SYSTEM

This information collection is authorized by law (P.L. 103-382). While participation in this collection is voluntary, your

cooperation is critical to make the results comprehensive, accurate, and timely.

IF ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE UPDATE DIRECTLY ON LABEL.

Name:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Telephone: _______________________________________________ E-mail: _________________________________________

Best days and times to contact you: _____________________________________________________________________________

THANK YOU. PLEASE KEEP A COPY OF THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR YOUR RECORDS.

RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO:

WESTAT, INC.

1650 Research Boulevard

Rockville, Maryland 20850

ATTN: Lewis, 900282

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CALL:

Laurie Lewis at Westat

800-937-8281, Ext. 8284 or 301-251-8284

Fax: 800-254-0984

E-mail: lewisl1@westat.com

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it

displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1850-0733. The time required

to complete this information collection is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions,

search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have any

comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of

Education, Washington, DC 20202-4651. If you have any comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission

of this form, write directly to: National Center for Education Statistics, 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20208.

FRSS Form No. 65, 02/98
E-4

CODES FOR TYPE OF TEACHING CERTIFICATE (FOR QUESTIONS 3 AND 4)

31 Regular or standard state certificate, or advanced professional certificate

32 Provisional or other type of certificate given to persons who are still participating in what the state calls

an “alternative certification program”

33 Probationary certificate (the initial certificate issued after satisfying all requirements except the

completion of a probationary period)

34 Temporary certificate (requires some additional college coursework and/or student teaching before

regular certification can be obtained)

35 Emergency certificate or waiver (issued to persons with insufficient teacher preparation who must

complete a regular certification program in order to continue teaching)

36 No certificate

CODES FOR TEACHING ASSIGNMENT FIELD (FOR QUESTION 4)

41 English/language arts (reading, writing, composition, journalism, literature, other English/language

arts)

42 Foreign languages (French, German, Latin, Spanish, other foreign language)

43 Mathematics (general mathematics, algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus, other mathematics)

44 Science (general science, biology/life science, chemistry, physics, geology/earth science, other

physical or natural science)

45 Social studies/social science (social studies, history, world civilization, political science/government,

civics, geography, economics, sociology, psychology, other social science)

46 All other fields (please specify the field)

CODES FOR MAJOR AND MINOR FIELD OF STUDY (FOR QUESTION 5)

EDUCATION FIELDS

General Education

51 Pre-elementary/early childhood education

52 Elementary education

53 Secondary education

Subject Area Education

54 English education, reading education

55 Foreign languages education

56 Mathematics education

57 Science education

58 Social studies/social sciences education

59 Other subject area education

Other Education

61 Special education

62 Curriculum and instruction

63 Educational administration

64 Other education

GENERAL FIELDS

71 Engineering

72 English (English/language arts, literature,

speech, classics, communications

and journalism)

73 Foreign languages

74 Mathematics

75 Science (biology/life science, chemistry,

geology/earth science, physics, other

physical or natural science)

76 Social sciences (history, political 

science/government, geography,

economics,sociology, psychology, public

affairs and services, other social science,

ethnic/area studies)

77 All other fields (please specify the field)
E-5

1. Which one of the following best describes your main teaching assignment at this school? (Circle only one

number.)

Teach a self-contained classroom (i.e., you teach all or most academic

subjects to the same group of students all or most of the day) .................................. 1 (Go to question 2.)

Teach math, science, English/language arts, social studies, or foreign

language in a departmentalized setting (i.e., you teach one of these

subjects to several classes of different students all or most of the day) .................... 2 (Go to question 4.)

Other teaching assignment........................................................................................ 3 (Stop. Call Westat

at 800-937-8281, ext. 8284, for instructions.)

FOR TEACHERS OF SELF-CONTAINED CLASSROOMS: Answer questions 2 and 3, and then go to question 5.

2. How many students are enrolled in your self-contained class? __________

3. Do you have a general elementary or secondary education teaching certificate in this state? If yes, enter the code

for the type of teaching certificate, using the list provided with this questionnaire.

Yes ...... 1 (Enter code from list for type of teaching certificate: ) No........ 2

FOR TEACHERS IN DEPARTMENTALIZED SETTINGS

4. For each different field you are assigned to teach at this school, write in the code for the teaching assignment field,

the number of classes or sections in that field you teach, and the number of students you teach in that field. Then,

for each teaching assignment field, write in the code for the type of teaching certificate, if any, you have in that

field in this state. See the lists provided with this questionnaire for the codes for teaching assignment field and

type of teaching certificate.

Write in information for your main teaching assignment field at this school first, that is, the field in which you teach

the most classes. Next write in information about your secondary teaching assignment field, that is, the field in

which you teach the second most classes, followed by information for any other teaching assignments you may

have at this school. If your teaching schedule is divided equally between two fields, record either field as your main

assignment.

Teaching assignment at this

school

Code for

teaching

assignment

field

Number of

classes or

sections taught

in field

Total number of

students taught

in field

Code for type of

teaching

certificate in

this field in this

state

Main (i.e., the field in which you

teach the most classes)

Secondary (i.e., the field in

which you teach the second

most classes)

Other teaching assignments

5. Please check the box(es) next to the degrees you hold, and write in the codes for your major and minor fields of

study for each degree, using the list provided with this questionnaire. If you completed more than one degree at a

level or had a double major or minor, please provide information for all fields of study at that degree level.

Degree Code(s) for major(s) Code(s) for minor(s)

Bachelor’s degree(s)

Master’s degree(s)

Doctorate degree(s)

Other degree(s)

 (specify:)_______________
E-6

6. Considering all of the professional development activities in which you participated in the last 12 months

(excluding preservice training), how many total hours, if any, have you spent in activities in which the following

content areas were a major focus? For any content area that was a major focus of professional development

activities, indicate to what extent you believe it has improved your classroom teaching.

Total hours spent Improved my teaching

Content area 0 1-8 9-32 More

than 32 A lot Moderately

SomewhatNot

at all

a. In-depth study in the subject area of

your main teaching assignment ............ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

b. New methods of teaching (e.g.,

cooperative learning)............................ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

c. State or district curriculum and

performance standards......................... 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

d. Integration of educational technology

in the grade or subject you teach.......... 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

e. Student performance assessment

(e.g., methods of testing, applying

results to modify instruction)................. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

f. Classroom management, including

student discipline.................................. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

g. Addressing the needs of students with

limited English proficiency or from

diverse cultural backgrounds ................ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

h. Addressing the needs of students with

disabilities ............................................ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

i. Other (please

describe)________________________ 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

7. In the last 12 months, how frequently have you participated in the following activities related to teaching? For any

activity in which you participated, indicate to what extent you believe the activity has improved your classroom

teaching. Exclude any activities you participated in during preservice training.

Frequency of activities Improved my teaching

Activity Never

At least

once a

week

2 to 3

times a

month

Once a

month

A few

times a

year

A lot Moderately

SomewhatNot

at all

a. Common planning period

for team teachers ................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4

b. Regularly scheduled

collaboration with other

teachers, excluding

meetings held for

administrative purposes........ 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4

c. Being mentored by another

teacher in a formal

relationship........................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4

d. Mentoring another teacher

in a formal relationship ......... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4

e. Networking with teachers

outside your school............... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4

f. Individual or collaborative

research on a topic of

interest to you

professionally .......................

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4

g. Other (please

describe)_______________ 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4
E-7

8. How well prepared do you feel to do the following activities in your classroom? (Circle one number on each line.)

Very well

prepared

Moderately

well

prepared

Somewhat

well

prepared

Not at all

prepared

a. Implement new methods of teaching (e.g., cooperative

learning) ................................................................................ 1 2 3 4

b. Implement state or district curriculum and performance

standards ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4

c. Integrate educational technology into the grade or subject

taught..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4

d. Use student performance assessment techniques (e.g.,

methods of testing, applying results to modify instruction) ...... 1 2 3 4

e. Maintain order and discipline in the classroom........................ 1 2 3 4

f. Address the needs of students with limited English

proficiency or from diverse cultural backgrounds (If you

teach no students with these characteristics, check the box

and go to item g.) ............................................................. 1 2 3 4

g. Address the needs of students with disabilities (If you teach

no students with disabilities, check the box and go to

question 9.) ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4

9. When you first began teaching, did you participate in a formal teacher induction program (for example, a program

to help beginning teachers by assigning them to master or mentor teachers)? Do not include student teaching.

Yes ........... 1 (Length of program:__________________________) No ............ 2

10. Do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? (Circle one number on each line.)

Strongly

agree

Somewhat

agree

Somewhat

disagree

Strongly

disagree

a. Parents support me in my efforts to educate their children.... 1 2 3 4

b. The school administration supports me in my work............... 1 2 3 4

c. Other teachers share ideas that are helpful to me in my

teaching ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4

d. Goals and priorities for the school are clear.......................... 1 2 3 4

11. What is your sex?

Male........... 1 Female......... 2

12. Are you of Hispanic or Latino origin?

Yes ............ 1 No ................ 2

13. What is your race? (Circle one or more to describe yourself.)

American Indian or Alaska Native ..................................... 1

Asian................................................................................. 2

Black or African American................................................. 3

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander ......................... 4

White ................................................................................ 5

14. Including this school year, how many years have you been employed as a teacher? _____ At this school? _____

(Include years spent teaching both full and part time, and in both public and private schools.)

15. What grades do you currently teach at this school? (Circle all that apply.)

PK K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
F-1

Appendix F

Selected Questionnaire Items from the 1993-94 Schools and

Staffing Survey Teacher Questionnaire
F-2
F-3
F-4
F-5
F-6
F-7
F-8
F-9
F-10
F-11
F-12
F-13
F-14
F-15
F-16
F-17