Clark, M. A., Isenberg, E., Liu, A. Y., Makowsky, L., & Zukiewicz, M. (2015). Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. Retrieved from http://www.mathematica-mpr.com.
Reviewed: February 2018
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Normative Update Tests of Achievement - reading subtests and state reading assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
35.00 |
34.00 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Normative Update Tests of Achievement and state math assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
31.00 |
30.00 |
No |
-- |
The study sample included 10 states, 13 school districts and other Teach for America (TFA) placement partners, 36 schools, and 156 teachers (66 TFA and 90 comparison teachers). The grade levels taught by the TFA and business-as-usual teachers ranged from pre-Kindergarten to fifth grade.
The average age for TFA teachers was 24 years old, with an average of 1.7 years of experience. In contrast, comparison teachers were 43 years old on average and had 13.6 years of experience. TFA teachers were mostly female (90%), and White and non-Hispanic (70%). Comparison teachers were also mostly female (99%) and 55% of them were White and non-Hispanic. Seventy-six percent of TFA teacher had graduated from selective colleges, whereas only 40% of comparison group had graduated from selective colleges.
The sample of TFA teachers was limited to those recruited in the first two years of the scale-up, who were in their first or second year of teaching in 2012-13. There are five main components of TFA: (1) recruiting applicants to the program; (2) selecting applicants with the potential to become effective teachers and asking them to make a 2-year commitment to teaching in a high-needs school; (3) providing TFA corps members with 5 weeks of preservice training before they begin their first teaching job; (4) helping TFA corps members find jobs in high-needs schools; and (5) providing ongoing training and support throughout the 2-year commitment.
Because the comparison condition was business-as-usual, it included any non-TFA teacher teaching a class in the same school at the same grade level and covering the same subjects as a participating TFA teacher. The comparison group had both new and experienced teachers and it included traditionally certified teachers and alternatively certified teachers.
After partner schools and districts hire corps members, regional TFA staff provide them with ongoing training and support during their 2-year commitment. This includes one-on-one coaching support, group meetings customized by grade and subject, and access to additional classroom resources and assessments via an online portal.
Reviewed: August 2016
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Teach for America (TFA).
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
End-of-Year Reading Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
End-of-Year Reading Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K and K;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
End-of-Year Reading Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–2;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
||
|
End-of-Year Reading Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–5, teachers in their first 2 years of teaching;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
End-of-Year Reading Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–5, TFA vs. traditionally certified;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
End-of-Year Reading Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades 3–5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
End-of-Year Math Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
End-of-Year Math Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–2;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
End-of-Year Math Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K and K;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
End-of-Year Math Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–5, teachers in their first 2 years of teaching;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
End-of-Year Math Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades pre-K–5, TFA vs. traditionally certified;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
End-of-Year Math Assessments |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
1 Years |
Grades 3–5;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 2% | |
| Black | 47% | |
| Other or unknown | 3% | |
| White | 7% |
| Hispanic | 42% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 58% |
The study was conducted in 36 schools in 13 TFA placement partners in 10 TFA regions in 10 states. The 13 placement partners included 11 traditional public school districts, one charter school district, and one community-based organization that manages an early childhood education program.
Among the students, 47% were female, 7% had an individualized education plan, 34% were limited English proficient, and 84% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. The racial/ethnic demographics were as follows: 47% were Black; 42% were Hispanic; 7% were White, 3% were another race, 2% were Asian.
Students were taught by TFA teachers. All but one of the TFA teachers were in their first or second year of teaching. The mean years of teaching experience was 1.7, and 76% of TFA teachers had a bachelor’s degree from a most, highly, or very competitive college or university. Among majors, 20% of TFA teachers majored in early childhood or elementary education, and 84% majored in a field unrelated to education. The mean age of TFA teachers at the time of the study was 24.4 years, and 90% of TFA teachers were female, 70% were White, 12% were Black, 12% were Asian, and 7% were Hispanic. The study assessed the effectiveness of TFA teachers during the second year of a TFA expansion effort, partially funded by a 5-year Investing in Innovation (i3) scale-up grant from the U.S. Department of Education. TFA increased its recruitment among less selective colleges, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities; however, the study authors found no evidence of a change in the program’s academic selection standards, as measured by undergraduate grade point average and SAT score. The authors found few substantive changes to TFA training and support under the scale-up. However, the authors noted declines in corps members’ satisfaction with the program.
Students in the comparison group were taught by teachers who did not enter teaching through TFA. The majority (85%) of comparison teachers were traditionally certified teachers (that is, they completed all certification requirements through a traditional university-based program prior to beginning teaching), with the remainder being alternatively certified (that is, they began teaching prior to completing all certification requirements). The mean years of teaching experience was 13.7. Among comparison teachers, 40% had a bachelor’s degree from a most, highly, or very competitive college or university; 81% majored in early childhood or elementary education, and 26% majored in a field unrelated to education. The mean age of comparison teachers at the time of the study was 42.8 years, and 99% of comparison teachers were female, 55% were White, 34% were Black, 11% were Hispanic, and 3% were Asian.
Training provided to TFA participants prior to their becoming classroom teachers involves a 5-week summer institute that includes group instruction on curriculum, literacy, and diversity; supervised teaching; observations of other teachers; feedback from advisors; small-group sessions on teaching practice, and lesson-planning clinics. During their 2-year commitment, TFA staff provide ongoing training and support that includes one-on-one coaching, grade/subject-specific group meetings, and access to online classroom resources and assessments. As noted above, the authors found few substantive changes to TFA training and support under the scale-up.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube