Elementary Teacher Preparation in
Mathematics: Louisiana

Delivering Well Prepared Teachers Policy

Goal

The state should ensure that new elementary teachers have sufficient knowledge of the mathematics content taught in elementary grades.

Meets a small part
Suggested Citation:
National Council on Teacher Quality. (2013). Elementary Teacher Preparation in Mathematics: Louisiana results. State Teacher Policy Database. [Data set].
Retrieved from: https://www.nctq.org/yearbook/state/LA-Elementary-Teacher-Preparation-in-Mathematics-20

Analysis of Louisiana's policies

Louisiana requires that all new early childhood and elementary teacher candidates pass a general elementary subject-matter test, the Praxis II. This commercial test lacks a specific mathematics subscore, so one can fail the mathematics portion and still pass the test. Further, while this test does cover important elementary school-level content, it barely evaluates candidates' knowledge beyond an elementary school level, does not challenge their understanding of underlying concepts and does not require candidates to apply knowledge in nonroutine, multistep procedures.

Although Louisiana requires that elementary teacher candidates complete 12 semester hours of mathematics, the state does not specify the requisite content of these courses or that they must meet the needs of elementary teachers. Louisiana also relies on NCATE/CAEP standards, suggesting that it uses Association for Childhood Education International (ACEI) standards for approving its elementary programs. ACEI standards address content in mathematics foundations, but the standards lack the specificity needed to ensure that teacher preparation programs deliver other mathematics content of appropriate breadth and depth to elementary teacher candidates. 

Citation

Recommendations for Louisiana

Require all teacher candidates who teach elementary grades to pass a rigorous mathematics assessment.

Louisiana should assess mathematics content with a rigorous assessment tool, such as the test required in Massachusetts that evaluates mathematics knowledge beyond an elementary school level and challenges candidates' understanding of underlying mathematics concepts. Such a test could also be used to allow candidates to test out of coursework requirements. Teacher candidates who lack minimum mathematics knowledge should not be eligible for licensure.

Require teacher preparation programs to provide mathematics content specifically geared to the needs of elementary teachers.

Louisiana must ensure that new teachers are prepared to teach the mathematics content required by the Common Core State Standards. Although ACEI standards require some knowledge in key areas of mathematics, Louisiana should require teacher preparation programs to provide mathematics content specifically geared to the needs of elementary teachers. This includes specific coursework in foundations, algebra and geometry, with some statistics coursework. 

State response to our analysis

Louisiana asserted that redesign courses must address state/national content and teacher standards, and that all redesigned programs were required to provide courses that addressed Louisiana and national content standards for students in the area of mathematics. Further, all elementary teachers are required to take 12 credit hours of content-specific mathematics courses and an additional nine credit hours of content and/or teaching methodology mathematics courses for a total of 21 mathematics-related courses.  When national experts evaluated the redesigned elementary teacher preparation programs, they closely examined the coursework to ensure that courses pertaining to algebra, geometry/measurement, statistics/probability and number structure were included because they were needed by teachers responsible for teaching the state mathematics content standards. Teacher preparation programs were not approved by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education or the Board of Regents unless they addressed these expectations.  In August 2013, NCTQ was provided copies of all Official Plans for all universities in Louisiana in connection with the Teacher Prep Review.  

Research rationale

Required math coursework should be tailored in both design and delivery to the unique needs of the elementary teacher.

Aspiring elementary teachers must begin to acquire a deep conceptual knowledge of the mathematics that they will teach, moving well beyond mere procedural understanding. Their training should focus on the critical areas of numbers and operations; algebra; geometry and, to a lesser degree, data analysis and probability.

To ensure that elementary teachers are well trained to teach the essential subject of mathematics, states must require teacher preparation programs to cover these four areas in coursework that it specially designed for prospective elementary teachers. Leading mathematicians and math educators have found that elementary teachers are not well served by courses designed for a general audience and that methods courses also do not provide sufficient preparation. According to Dr. Roger Howe, a mathematician at Yale University: "Future teachers do not need so much to learn more mathematics, as to reshape what they already know."

Most states' policies do not require preparation in mathematics of appropriate breadth and depth and specific to the needs of the elementary teacher. NCTQ's reports on teacher preparation, beginning with No Common Denominator: The Preparation of Elementary Teachers in Mathematics by America's Education Schools in 2008 and continuing through the Teacher Prep Review in 2013 have consistently found few teacher preparation programs across the country providing high-quality preparation in mathematics. Whether through standards or coursework requirements, states must ensure that their preparation programs graduate only teacher candidates who are well prepared to teach mathematics.

Many state tests offer no assurance that teachers are prepared to teach mathematics.

An increasing number of states require passage of a mathematics subtest as a condition of licensure., but many states still rely on subject-matter tests that include some items (or even a whole section) on mathematics instruction. However, since subject-specific passing scores are not required, one need not know much mathematics in order to pass. In fact, one could answer every mathematics question incorrectly and still pass. States need to ensure that it is not possible to pass a licensure test that purportedly covers mathematics without knowing the critical material.

The content of these tests poses another issue: these tests should properly test elementary and middle school content but not at an elementary or middle school level.  Instead, problems should challenge the teacher candidate's understanding of underlying concepts and apply knowledge in nonroutine, multistep procedures.  Unfortunately, this is not the case in the tests currently in use in most states. The test required by Massachusetts remains the standard bearer for a high quality, rigorous assessment for elementary teachers entirely and solely focused on mathematics.

Elementary Teacher Preparation in Mathematics: Supporting Research

For evidence that new teachers are not appropriately prepared to teach mathematics, see NCTQ, No Common Denominator: The Preparation of Elementary Teachers in Mathematics by America's Education Schools (2008) at:http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/nctq_ttmath_fullreport_20090603062928.pdf

For information on the mathematics content elementary teachers need to know, see National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, "Highly Qualified Teachers: A Position of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics," (July 2005). See also Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, The Mathematical Education of Teachers, Issues in Mathematics, Vol. 11, (American Mathematical Society in cooperation with the Mathematical Association of America, 2001), p. 8.

For evidence on the benefits of math content knowledge on student achievement, see S. Kukla-Acevedo "Do Teacher Characteristics Matter? New Results on the Effects of Teacher Preparation on Student Achievement." Economics of Education Review, Volume 28, 2009, pp. 49-57; H. Hill, B. Rowan and D. Ball "Effects of Teachers' Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching on Student Achievement," American Educational Research Journal, Volume 42, No. 2, Summer 2005, pp. 371-406.

For information on where states set passing scores on elementary level content tests for teacher licensing across the U.S., see chart on p. 13 of NCTQ "Recommendations for the Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Removing the Roadblocks: How Federal Policy Can Cultivate Effective Teachers," (2011).