Transforming Teacher Work Around the World
There is no single path to bring about the changes we are envisioning. In fact, a quick look at some of the countries lauded for their educational systems shows that each took different roads to transforming teacher work. Illinois can draw from their experiences as it tries to do the same.
Singapore clearly articulates three paths for teachers to advance. Those committed to working with students can rise to the level of master teacher by staying on the teaching track. Those interested in education policy and management can follow the leadership track to positions in schools or at the Ministry of Education. And those "inclined towards more specialized areas where deep knowledge and skills are essential for breaking new ground" can opt for the senior specialist track.i Each track is compensated through a system of bonuses for roles and performance-linked salary scales.
China, likewise, offers well-defined designations and recognitions at the district, provincial, and national levels. Teacher leaders power China's intensive mentorship system. They also plan how curriculum will be taught and share best practices across schools to create consistency.ii While Sweden does not have similarly formal paths, it has instituted individualized and locally-determined pay systems with broad union support that give principals greater discretion in building teams, filling high-demand positions, and rewarding teachers for innovation and leadership roles.iii
Another variable is how teachers divide their work days. In Japan, teachers spend the majority of time in planning, collaboration, and individual student assistance with only 40% spent in direct instruction.iv This is common practice in many OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, where non-classroom time is considered essential to such collaborative work as lesson study, peer observations, and action research.v Here in Illinois, teachers are likely to spend 70% of their day in the classroom.vi Over the course of the year, this means that the average elementary teacher is spending three to four hundred more hours in direct instruction (with little opportunity to collaborate) - and yet countries like Japan consistently report better student outcomes.vii
In Finland, this emphasis on collaborative time is also the norm. Teachers share a strong ingrained sense of mutual responsibility for ensuring equitable outcomes for students across racial, religious and socioeconomic lines. So strong, in fact, that in the early 1990s, the national Ministry of Education abolished its central inspectorate—trusting in teachers and principals to hold each other accountable for student achievement.viii
Japanese teachers rely on collaboration to improve pedagogy, as well. Faculty members employ a team approach when developing or redesigning classes. One teacher will trial a course with fellow teachers, who will critique and refine the creation until all are satisfied. Those teachers who excel in leading course developments are asked to share their work both within and outside their districts.ix Teachers become leaders organically, by demonstrating proficiency to their peers and earning their peers’ respect.
There’s no one road to reform. But as the experiences of these countries demonstrate, a broader vision of teaching will allow us to reach our goal.
i Ministry of Education, Singapore. (n.d.) Teaching as a Career: Career Information. Retrieved September, 2011 from http://www.moe.gov.sg/careers/teach/career-info/
ii Mourshed, M.; Chijioke, C.; & Barber, M. (2010). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. McKinsey Associates. Retrieved September 2011 from http://mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education/How-the-Worlds-Most-Improved-School-Systems-Keep-Getting-Better_Download-version_Final.pdf
iii Teacher policy reforms in Sweden: The case of individualized pay. (Partis, France: International Institute for Educational Planning & the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization; 2004), retrieved October 20,2011 from http://www.unesco.org/iiep/eng/research/basic/PDF/teachers2.pdf.
iv Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Education at a glance, 2010: OECD indicators.(Paris, France: Author), retrieved October 11, 2011, from http://www.oecd.org/document/52/0,3746,en_2649_39263238_45897844_1_1_1_1,00.html.
v Darling-Hammond, L., Chung Wei, R., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orfanos, S., Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad (Oxford, OH:National Staff Development Council, 2009), retrieved September, 2011 from http://www.nsdc.org/news/NSDCstudy2009.pdf.
vi Darling-Hammond, L., The flat world and education: How America's commitment to equity will determine our future (New York: Teacher’s College Press, 2010).
vii Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). Education at a glance, 2010: OECD indicators. Retrieved March, 2011 from http://www.oecd.org/document/52/0,3746,en_2649_39263238_45897844_1_1_1_1,00.html
viii Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Strong performers and successful reformers in education: Lessons from PISA for the United States (Paris, France: Author, 2010), retrieved October 11, 2011, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/32/50/46623978.pdf.
ix Tucker, M., Standing on the shoulders of giants: An American agenda for education reform (Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy, 2011).
