Principals and Teachers Used a Variety of Instructional Practices to Help Students Meet Standards, and Many of These Practices Were Used More Frequently at Schools with Higher Proportions of Low- Income and Minority Students

According to our analysis of NLS-NCLB data from Education, most  principals reported their schools focused on multiple instructional  practices in their voluntary school improvement efforts. Likewise, the survey of math teachers in California, Georgia, and  Pennsylvania indicates teachers were using many different instructional  practices in response to their state tests, and teachers at high-poverty and  high-minority schools were more likely than teachers at low-poverty and  low-minority schools to have been increasing their use of some of these  practices. Some researchers we spoke with suggested that differences in  the use of these instructional practices exist because schools with low- poverty or low-minority student populations might generally be meeting  accountability standards and, therefore, would need to try these strategies  less frequently. Most Math Teachers in Three Surveyed States Have Increased Their Use of Certain Instructional Practices in Response to State Tests, especially in High-Poverty and High- Minority Schools

The RAND survey of elementary and middle school math teachers in  California, Georgia and Pennsylvania showed that in each of the three  states at least half of the teachers reported increasing their use of certain  instructional practices in at least five areas as a result of the statewide  math test (see fig. For example, most teachers in Pennsylvania  responded that due to the state math test they: (1) focused more on  standards, (2) emphasized assessment styles and formats, (3) focused  more on subjects tested, (4) searched for more effective teaching methods,  and (5) spent more time teaching content. Research Shows That Standards-based Accountability Systems Can Influence Instructional Practices through Standards and Assessments in Both Positive and Negative Ways

Research shows that using a standards-based curriculum that is aligned  with corresponding instructional guidelines can positively influence  teaching practices. However, some studies indicated that teachers’ practices did not always  reflect the principles of standards-based instruction and that current  accountability policies help contribute to the difficulty in aligning practice  with standards. Another key element of a standards-based accountability system is  assessments, which help measure the extent to which schools are  improving student learning through assessing student performance against  the standards. Some researchers note that assessments are powerful tools  for managing and improving the learning process by providing information  for monitoring student progress, making instructional decisions,  evaluating student achievement, and evaluating programs. Research Highlights Some Potentially Successful Practices for Improving Student Achievement, although Experts Contend That Methodological Issues Constrain Reaching Definitive Conclusions about What Works

Our literature review found some studies that pointed to instructional  practices that appear to be effective in raising student achievement. Some of the practices identified by both the studies and a few experts as  those with potential for improving student achievement were:    Differentiated instruction. These kinds of learning  processes are important for higher-order thinking. To  determine the types of instructional practices schools and teachers are  using to help students achieve state academic standards and whether  those practices differ by school characteristics, we used two recent  surveys of principals and teachers. From these sources, we identified 251 studies that were relevant  to our study objectives about the effect of standards-based accountability  systems on instructional practices and instructional practices there are  effective in raising student achievement.
Why GAO Did This Study

The federal government has invested billions of dollars to improve student academic performance, and many schools, teachers, and researchers are trying to determine the most effective instructional practices with which to accomplish this. The Conference Report for the Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2008 directed GAO to study strategies used to prepare students to meet state academic achievement standards. To do this, GAO answered: (1) What types of instructional practices are schools and teachers most frequently using to help students achieve state academic standards, and do those instructional practices differ by school characteristics? (2) What is known about how standards-based accountability systems have affected instructional practices? (3) What is known about instructional practices that are effective in improving student achievement? GAO analyzed data from a 2006-2007 national survey of principals and 2005-2006 survey of teachers in three states, conducted a literature review of the impact of standards-based accountability systems on instructional practices and of practices that are effective in improving student achievement, and interviewed experts.

What GAO Found

Nationwide, most principals focused on multiple strategies to help students meet academic standards, such as using student data to inform instruction and increasing professional development for teachers, according to our analysis of data from a U.S. Department of Education survey. Many of these strategies were used more often at high-poverty schools--those where 75 percent or more of the students were eligible for the free and reduced-price lunch program--and high-minority schools--those where 75 percent or more of students were identified as part of a minority population, than at lower poverty and minority schools. Likewise, math teachers in California, Georgia, and Pennsylvania increased their use of certain instructional practices in response to their state tests, such as focusing more on topics emphasized on assessments and searching for more effective teaching methods, and teachers at high-poverty and high-minority schools were more likely than teachers at lower-poverty schools and lower-minority schools to have made these changes, according to GAO's analysis of survey data collected by the RAND Corporation. Some researchers suggested that differences exist in the use of these practices because schools with lower poverty or lower minority student populations might generally be meeting accountability requirements and therefore would need to try these strategies less frequently. Research shows that standards-based accountability systems can influence instructional practices in both positive and negative ways. For example, some research notes that using a standards-based curriculum that is aligned with corresponding instructional guidelines can facilitate the development of higher order thinking skills in students. But, in some cases, teacher practices did not always reflect the principles of standards-based instruction, and the difficulties in aligning practice with standards were attributed, in part, to current accountability requirements. Other research noted that assessments can be powerful tools for improving the learning process and evaluating student achievement, but assessments can also have some unintended negative consequences on instruction, including narrowing the curriculum to only material that is tested. Many experts stated that methodological issues constrain knowing more definitively the specific instructional practices that improve student learning and achievement. Nevertheless, some studies and experts pointed to instructional practices that are considered to be effective in raising student achievement, such as differentiated instruction. Professional development for teachers was also highlighted as important for giving teachers the skills and knowledge necessary to implement effective teaching practices.