The state should ensure that new elementary teachers have sufficient knowledge of the mathematics content taught in elementary grades.
Oklahoma requires all new elementary teachers to pass the elementary Oklahoma Subject Area Test. The state posts only a limited number of sample items, and a review of this material calls the rigor of its test into question; the test items representing elementary school content assess understanding at too superficial a level. Although the state subject-examination test requires passing scores on both of its subtests, one subtest combines mathematics, social studies, science, and health, fitness and the arts.
Regrettably, Oklahoma's early childhood education teachers, who are allowed to teach through grade 3, are not required to pass a content test.Oklahoma 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 these standards lack the specificity needed to ensure that teacher preparation programs deliver other mathematics content of appropriate breadth and depth to elementary teacher candidates.
Further, the framework for Oklahoma's elementary content test covers numbers and operations, data analysis, and basic concepts of geometry and algebra. However, the standards are not specifically geared to meet the needs of elementary teachers. And because the test does not report a specific math score, a teacher candidate could answer many math questions incorrectly and still pass the test.
Test Requirement www.ceoe.nesinc.com www.acei.org
Require all teacher candidates who teach elementary grades to pass a rigorous mathematics assessment.
Although Oklahoma is on the right track in requiring an elementary assessment with subtests, the state's efforts fall short by combining math with other subjects and not reporting a specific subscore for math. Oklahoma should strengthen its policy by testing 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.
Oklahoma should also ensure that early childhood education teacher candidates who teach its elementary grades possess the requisite knowledge of mathematics before entering the classroom. Therefore, the state should require these candidates to earn a passing score on a rigorous math assessment as well.
Require teacher preparation programs to provide mathematics content specifically geared to the needs of elementary teachers.
Oklahoma must ensure that new teachers are prepared to teach the mathematics content required by the Common Core State Standards. Although ACEI standards and the state's subject-matter test require some knowledge in key areas of mathematics, Oklahoma 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.
Oklahoma asserted that subtest two of its elementary education subject-area test measures knowledge in number operations, algebra, geometry, measurement, statistics and probability, and that the math portion of the subtest is weighted 45 percent of the total score. The state also noted that the practice selected-response questions and any practice constructed-response assignments included in this section are designed to provide an introduction to the nature of the questions. The practice test questions represent the various types of questions one may expect to see on an actual test; however, they are not designed to provide diagnostic information to help identify specific areas of individual strengths and weaknesses, or to predict performance on the test as a whole. Oklahoma added that these questions are not reflective of rigor but only reflect the types of questions an examinee will see.
Even if the test is more rigorous than it appears from the published questions, it is still possible for candidates to compensate for weakness in mathematics because of the other subject matter included in the subtest and score.
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).