Training to Teach Science : Experimental Evidence from Argentina
This paper evaluates the learning impact of different teacher training methods using a random controlled trial implemented in 70 state schools in Buenos Aires, Argentina. A control group receiving standard teacher training was compared with two alt...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/992241537378173492/Training-to-Teach-Science-Experimental-Evidence-from-Argentina http://hdl.handle.net/10986/30442 |
| Summary: | This paper evaluates the learning impact
of different teacher training methods using a random
controlled trial implemented in 70 state schools in Buenos
Aires, Argentina. A control group receiving standard teacher
training was compared with two alternative treatment arms:
providing a structured curriculum unit or receiving both the
unit and weekly coaching. Following a 12-week intervention,
there are substantial learning gains for students whose
teachers were trained using structured curriculum units, as
well as for those whose teachers received coaching (between
55 percent and 64 percent of a standard deviation more than
those students in the control group). Coaching teachers does
not appear to be cost-effective, as the unit cost per 0.1
standard deviation is more than twice the cost of using only
the structured curriculum unit. However, additional coaching
is particularly beneficial for inexperienced teachers with
less than two years of teaching Science. Coaching teachers
also showed specific gains for girls, who both learned and
declared to enjoy science lessons more. Higher-performing
students especially benefited from both interventions, with
students from coached teachers performing particularly well
in harder questions. Using structured curriculum units and
providing coaching also affected teacher perceptions:
teachers expressed that they enjoyed teaching Science more
and taught more hours of Science, and that their students
developed more skills. Results from a follow-up survey
suggest persistent change in teacher practice, with the vast
majority reporting using the structured curriculum unit one
year after the intervention. |
|---|