saber teachers russia cr final 2014 - world...

Russia

TEACHERS SABER Report2014

Policy Goals Tomsk Ivanovo St. Petersburg

1. Setting Clear Expectations for TeachersWhile teachers have substantial time for other tasks outside of class time, official teacher duties do not include any of the most common tasks related to instructional improvement.

Established Established Established

2. Attracting the Best into TeachingAlthough policies regarding career progression and three different pathways to enter the profession suggest the profession is an option for effective teachers, the minimum education requirement for primary school teachers suggest it is not attractive.


3. Preparing Teachers with Useful Training and ExperienceLow minimum education requirement for primary school teachers and indefinite requirements for practical experience suggest teachers may not begin their career adequately prepared.

Emerging Emerging Emerging

4. Matching Teachers’ Skills with Students’ NeedsOf the three, only Tomsk provides incentives to attract teachers to hard-to-staff schools. None of the three provide incentives to attract greater numbers of teachers of critical shortage subjects.

Emerging Latent Latent

5. Leading Teachers with Strong PrincipalsNational and subnational policies do not stipulate that principals should serve as instructional leaders or provide teachers with guidance.

Latent Latent Latent

6. Monitoring Teaching and LearningAll teachers are evaluated at least every five years, but there are no policies expecting principals to provide teachers with feedback.


7. Supporting Teachers to Improve InstructionTeachers are required to complete limited continuing professional development at least every five years; there are no policies to ensure that professional development activities are collaborative and focused on improving instruction.

Latent Emerging Emerging

8. Motivating Teachers to PerformTeachers’ performance can influence their promotions and compensation, and teachers can be dismissed for absenteeism, misconduct, and child abuse, but not poor performance.


RUSSIA | TEACHER POLICY SABER COUNTRY REPORT |2014

SYSTEMS APPROACH FOR BETTER EDUCATION RESULTS 2

Overview of SABER TeachersThere is increasing interest across the globe in attracting,retaining, developing, and motivating great teachers.Student achievement has been found to correlate witheconomic and social progress (Hanushek & Woessmann2007, 2009; Pritchett & Viarengo 2009; Campante &Glaeser 2009), and teachers are key: recent studies haveshown that teacher quality is the main school basedpredictor of student achievement and that severalconsecutive years of outstanding teaching can offset thelearning deficits of disadvantaged students (Hanushek &Rivkin 2010; Rivkin et al. 2005; Nye et al. 2004; Rockoff2004; Park & Hannum 2001; Sanders & Rivers 1996).However, achieving the right teacher policies to ensurethat every classroom has a motivated, supported, andcompetent teacher remains a challenge, becauseevidence on the impacts of many teacher policiesremains insufficient and scattered, the impact of manyreforms depends on specific design features, and teacherpolicies can have very different impacts depending onthe context and other education policies in place.

SABER Teachers aims to help fill this gap by collecting,analyzing, synthesizing, and disseminatingcomprehensive information on teacher policies inprimary and secondary education systems around theworld. SABER Teachers is a core component of SABER(Systems Approach for Better Education Results), aninitiative of the World Bank’s Education Global Practice.SABER collects information about different educationsystems’ policy domains, analyzes it to identify commonchallenges and promising solutions, and makes it widelyavailable to inform countries’ decisions on where andhow to invest in order to improve education quality.

SABER Teachers collects data on ten core teacher policyareas to offer a comprehensive descriptive overview ofthe teacher policies that are in place in eachparticipating education system (see Box 1). Data arecollected in each participating education system by aspecialized consultant using a questionnaire that ensurescomparability of information across different educationsystems. Data collection focuses on the rules andregulations governing teacher management systems.This information is compiled in a comparative databasewhere interested stakeholders can access detailedinformation organized along relevant categories thatdescribe how different education systems manage theirteaching force, as well as copies of supporting

documents. The full database is available at the SABERwebsite.

Box 1. Teacher policy areas for data collection1. Requirements to enter and remain in teaching2. Initial teacher education3. Recruitment and employment4. Teachers’ workload and autonomy5. Professional development6. Compensation (salary and non salary benefits)7. Retirement rules and benefits8. Monitoring and evaluation of teacher quality9. Teacher representation and voice10. School leadership

To offer informed policy guidance, SABER Teachersanalyzes these data to assess how well each system’steacher policies are oriented toward promoting studentachievement, based on the global evidence to date.Specifically, SABER Teachers assesses each educationsystem’s progress in achieving 8 Teacher Policy Goals(Box 2).

Box 2. Teacher policy goals for evaluation1. Setting clear expectations for teachers2. Attracting the best into teaching3. Preparing teachers with useful training4. Matching teachers’ skills with students’ needs5. Leading teachers with strong principals6. Monitoring teaching and learning7. Supporting teachers to improve instruction8. Motivating teachers to perform



The 8 Teacher Policy Goals are functions that all highperforming education systems fulfill to a certain extentin order to ensure that every classroom has amotivated, supported, and competent teacher. Thesegoals were identified through a review of evidence ofresearch studies on teacher policies, as well as analysisof policies of top performing and rapidly improvingeducation systems. Three criteria were used to identifythe teacher policy goals: they had to be (i) linked tostudent performance through empirical evidence; (ii) apriority for resource allocation; and (iii) actionable,meaning that they identify actions that governments cantake to improve education policy. The 8 Teacher PolicyGoals exclude other objectives that countries might alsowant to pursue to increase the effectiveness of theirteachers, but on which there is too little empiricalevidence at this point to allow specific policyrecommendations.

Figure 1: 8 Teacher Policy Goals

By classifying countries according to their performanceon each of the 8 Teacher Policy Goals, SABER Teacherscan help diagnose the key challenges that countries facein ensuring they have effective teachers. For each policygoal, the SABER Teachers team identified policy levers(actions that governments can take to reach these goals)and indicators (which measure the extent to whichgovernments are making effective use of these policy

levers). Using these policy levers and indicators, SABERTeachers classifies education systems’ progress towardachieving each of the 8 Teacher Policy Goals using a fourcategory scale (latent, emerging, established, andadvanced). The scale assesses the extent to which agiven education system has put in place the type ofteacher policies that are known to be related toimproved student outcomes (Annex 1). The mainobjective of this assessment is to identify the strengthsand weaknesses of the teacher policies of an educationsystem and pinpoint possible areas for improvement. Fora more detailed report on the 8 Teacher Policy Goals,policy levers and indicators, as well as the evidence basesupporting them, see Vegas et al. (2012).

The main focus of SABER Teachers is on policy design,rather than on policy implementation. SABER Teachersanalyzes the teacher policies formally adopted byeducation systems. This type of policy analysis is animportant first step toward strengthening the policy andinstitutional frameworks that policymakers control mostdirectly and that influence how well the systemfunctions. At the same time, policies “on the ground”—that is, policies as they are actually implemented—maydiffer quite substantially from policies as originallydesigned. In fact they often do differ, due to the politicaleconomy of the reform process, a lack of capacity of theorganizations charged with implementing them, or theinteraction between these policies and specificcontextual factors. Since SABER Teachers collects onlylimited data on policy implementation, the analysis ofteacher policies presented in this report should ideally becomplemented with other data gathering effortsfocusing on how well teacher policies are actuallyimplemented on the ground.

This report presents results of the application of SABERTeachers in three administrative divisions of Russia. Itdescribes the performance of Tomsk oblast, Ivanovooblast, and St. Petersburg in each of the 8 Teacher PolicyGoals, alongside comparative information fromeducation systems.



Teacher policy system results in Russia:Ivanovo, Tomsk, and St. Petersburg

Introduction

The purpose of the report is to compare the threeregions (Tomsk oblast, Ivanovo oblast, and St.Petersburg) to each other, global peers, and the practicesof high performing education systems. The reportincludes four comparators: Serbia and Bulgaria asregional comparators with available data, and SouthKorea and Singapore as examples of best practices.Examples of policies from other countries are also usedto highlight particular achievements and efficient policyapproaches to specific dimensions. Additional detaileddescriptive information on Russia’s and other educationsystems’ teacher policies can be found on the SABERTeachers website.

The report was prepared together with a research teamfrom the Higher School of Economics (HSE), Moscow,Russia. An additional goal of the exercise was to createHSE’s research capacity in benchmarking regionaleducational systems using SABER tools.

The report reviews teacher policies in three selfnominated Russian regions. The regions are diverse interms of socioeconomic development: St. Petersburgrepresents a high income city with the status of Subjectof the Federation; Tomsk is a mid income Siberian regionwith significant scientific, innovative and highereducation capacity; and Ivanovo is a low incomeindustrialized region in the central part of the country.

While some directions of the teacher related policies areregulated at the federal level, a significant share of theresponsibility lies with the regions. Thus, most of thefindings of the report are region specific. At the sametime, all three regions demonstrated fairly harmonizedprogress in the majority of the policy dimensions. Suchconcord could be explained by the fact that Russianregions are traditionally disposed to following Federalguidance and recommendations and show lowproactivity in developing unique and region tailoredpolicies. However, this early hypothesis needs to befurther explored.

1 As assessed through international comparative studies (i.e. PISA,TIMSS and PIRLS) and national education quality reviews.

Goal 1: Setting clear expectations for teachers

Tomsk EstablishedIvanovo EstablishedSt. Petersburg Established

Setting clear expectations for student and teacherperformance is important to guide teachers’ daily workand align necessary resources toward helping teachersconstantly improve instructional practice. In addition,clear expectations can help ensure there is coherenceamong different key aspects of the teaching profession,such as teacher initial education, professionaldevelopment, and teacher appraisal.

SABER Teachers considers two policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) clear expectationsfor what students should know and be able to do, andhow teachers can help students reach these goals; (2)useful guidance on teachers’ use of time to be able toimprove instruction at the school level.

(1) In Russia, expectations for what students areexpected to learn and for what teachers are supposedto do are set by the national government. The Ministryof Education and Science is responsible for settingeducation goals and controlling the national curriculum.There are officially stipulated requirements for theminimum education, curriculum, and skills students mustattain in every subject by every grade.

The tasks teachers are expected to carry out are officiallyspecified by the policy. They include the duties necessaryfor a teacher to be prepared and continually improving—tasks such as supervising students, grading assessments,and standing in for absent teachers.

(2) Guidance on teachers’ use of time could focus moreon ensuring that expectations are set in a way as toimprove instruction. While nearly all governmentsdescribe expectations for teachers, the most successfulsystems expect teachers to focus on continualimprovement of instruction and provide them withsufficient time to complete their tasks. Successfuleducation systems 1 such as Ontario, Finland, Japan,South Korea, and Singapore devote considerable time atthe school level to activities that are related to



instructional improvement, such as collaboration amongteachers on the analysis of instructional practice as wellas mentoring and professional development (DarlingHammond & Rothman 2011, Darling Hammond 2010,Levin 2008). In addition, these systems tend to devote asmaller share of teachers’ time to actual contact timewith students than other systems do, and a larger shareto teacher collaboration, on site professionaldevelopment, and research on the effectiveness ofvarious teaching strategies. Japan, for example, devotesabout 40 percent of teachers’ working time to these typeof activities, while Ontario currently devotes 30 percent(Darling Hammond & Rothman 2011).

Despite an enumeration of teacher tasks, the list ofduties for teachers in Russia excludes many commonactivities related to instructional improvement. Theirduties exclude collaborating on a school plan, modifyingthe school curriculum, taking part in internal evaluationactivities, and mentoring or supporting other teachers.Other education systems, such as Serbia, include thetasks in official descriptions to reflect expectations andpriorities for teachers.

In Russia, primary school teachers are expected to teach18 of their 36 work hours per week, which provides themsufficient time to complete duties outside of contacttime. In addition, the definition of teacher working timeis not limited to the hours spent at school, but includesall working time. While these definitions may allowteachers sufficient time to focus on instructionalimprovement, without guidance, they may not use thistime to that end. Japan, similarly, devotes half of workingtime to non teaching tasks. In addition to lessonpreparation, these include peer meetings to discuss howto teach current content or incorporate new pedagogicalmethods, mentor peers, or other tasks linked to overallimproving teacher effectiveness.

Figure 2. Teachers’ official tasks related to schoolimprovement

Men

torp

eers

Collabo

rate

onscho

olplan

Desig

nthe

curriculum

Participatein

scho

olevaluatio

n

Tomsk

Ivanovo

St. Petersburg

Serbia

Bulgaria

South Korea

SingaporeSource: SABER Teachers data

Goal 2: Attracting the best into teaching


The structure and characteristics of the teaching careercan make it more or less attractive for talentedindividuals to decide to become teachers. Talentedpeople may be more inclined to become teachers if theysee that entry requirements are on par with those ofwell regarded professions, if compensation and workingconditions are adequate, and if there are attractivecareer opportunities for them to develop asprofessionals.

SABER Teachers considers four policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) requirements toenter the teaching profession; (2) competitive pay; (3)appealing working conditions; and (4) attractive careeropportunities.

(1) In Russia, teacher entrants must have a minimaltertiary qualification.The level of required education for teachersmay indicatethe attractiveness of the profession. While not the onlyway to communicate that it is an attractive profession, isserves as one of the indicators: education systems whereteacher positions are competitive often have rigorousentry requirements. Systems where entry to the



profession is most demanding require a researchoriented bachelor’s or master’s degree.In Russia, primary school teachers are required tograduate from vocational upper secondary schools,which are referred to as teacher colleges (NORRIC, 2005).They are internationally comparable to lower tertiaryprograms. Teachers at the secondary school levelgraduate with the equivalent of a bachelor’s degree andspecialize in teaching a particular subject.

In addition to the educational requirement, otherrequirements can convey the selectivity of theprofession. Before entering the profession, teachers arerequired to have some practical professional experience,but not an assessment based on practical work, aninterview stage assessment, or a written test.

Countries should strive to select the best candidates tobecome teachers, and it is most efficient to do so from abroad pool of candidates. By offering multiple paths intothe profession, candidates with varied professionalbackgrounds may enter. In Russia, there are many pathsto become a teacher. A person may complete abachelor’s degree in education or a relevant field;acquire a relevant vocational degree in education(referred to as a secondary education in Russia); oracquire a vocational degree in a relevant field andreceive professional training in education and pedagogy.By making the profession accessible to committed youngpeople and mid career professionals, a variety oftalented candidates may enter.

(2) Teacher compensation and promotions may notappeal to talented candidates. The available evidencesuggests that teacher pay could deter qualifiedcandidates from the profession. According to OECD,primary school teachers make 82 percent of the averageearnings of a Russian worker with a tertiary education(OECD, 2013). Average lower and upper secondaryteacher salaries are 85 percent and 89 percent of averageworker salaries, respectively.

Figure 3. Teacher Salaries, as percent of GDP per capitaPrimary Secondary Combined

Nationwide 85 89 n/aTomsk n/a n/a 106Ivanovo n/a n/a 97St. Petersburg n/a n/a 117

Note: Nationwide Data from OECD; Tomsk, Ivanovo, and St. Petersburg Datafrom Russian Federal State Statistics Service (2014). Other countries excludeddue to lack of comparable data.n/a – not available

Similarly, the potential for salary increases can attract ordeter qualified candidates. Teacher salaries (oklad,excluding incentives and benefits), on average, increaseless than 20 percent after 15 years of experience, or 1.2percent annualized, which is lower than many educationsystems (OECD, 2013). While pay compression may be aproblem, teachers can receive higher pay based on theirperformance, which may help make the profession moreattractive. While other attributes of the profession, suchas retirement opportunities and flexible schedules, mayalso affect the attractiveness of the profession, theireffect is difficult to measure.

(3) It is unclear whether working conditions areattractive. While school conditions are important forlearning, they can also affect teacher morale. If manyschools have inadequate facilities, candidates maychoose a profession with a more pleasant environment.In Russia, there are standards for school infrastructure,hygiene, and sanitation, but the exact level ofcompliance is unknown. According to the “Our NewSchool” monitoring program, between 80 percent and100 percent of schools in Ivanovo and St. Petersburg arein compliance, and 60 percent to 80 percent of schools inTomsk. Without more precise values, it is difficult todetermine the adequacy of school infrastructure.

Pupil teacher ratios can also affect how attractive theprofession is. If schools have unmanageably large classes,the profession may appear overwhelming. The pupilteacher ratios are low in Ivanovo, Tomsk, and St.Petersburg, and nationwide (See Figure 4), increasing theattractiveness of the profession.



Figure 4. Student teacher ratio, primary and secondaryschools

Prim

ary

Second

ary

Russian Federation 20 9

Tomsk 19 9

Ivanovo 14*

St. Petersburg 15*

Serbia 16 9

Bulgaria 18 13

South Korea 18 18

Singapore 17 15Source: SABER Teachers data and UNESCO Institute for Statistics. Note: *Thenumber of pupils and teachers in Ivanovo, and Tomsk were only available withprimary and secondary school aggregated.

(4) Opportunities for career advancement may beappealing enough to help attract talented individuals tothe teaching profession. Teachers in most educationsystems are offered opportunities for promotion toprincipal positions at some point in their careers. Inaddition to these “vertical” promotions, most highperforming education systems offer teachers thepossibility of “horizontal” promotions, to academicpositions that allow them to grow professionally asteachers and yet remain closely connected to instruction,instead of moving up to managerial positions (OECD2012, Darling Hammond 2010).

Policies in Russia offer various opportunities for careeradvancement to teachers. Teachers have the option ofapplying to either school administration posts as schoolprincipals or applying to become instructional leaders. Alimited number of teachers may become the head of amethodological association.Methodological associationsare subject specific associations of teachers. Their dutiesmay include approving curricula, sharing their knowledgeand experience, managing joint educational projects, orassisting young teachers in adapting to the environment.

Goal 3: Preparing teachers with usefultraining and experience

Tomsk EmergingIvanovo EmergingSt. Petersburg Emerging

Equipping teachers with the skills they need to succeedin the classroom is crucial. To be successful, teachersneed subject matter and pedagogic knowledge, as wellas classroom management skills and a lot of teachingpractice. Good preparation puts all teachers on an equalfooting, giving them a common framework for improvingtheir practice.

SABER Teachers considers two policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) minimumstandards for pre service training programs; (2) requiredlevels of classroom experience for all teachers.

(1) Minimum education requirements in Russia are lowfor primary school teachers but substantial forsecondary school teachers. Virtually all high performingcountries require that teachers have an educational levelequivalent to ISCED 5A, or bachelor’s degree. The mosteffective teacher preparation empowers teachers withboth the practical knowledge necessary to teach and theskills to research and assess effective teaching methods.Some systems, such as Finland, go beyond ISCED 5A torequire a research oriented master’s degree (OECD2011). Despite Russia’s highly educated population,primary school teachers only need to graduate from avocational secondary school known as a teachers’ college(ISCED 5B).



Figure 5. Required educational level, primary schoolteachers

ISCE

D5B

ISCE

D5A

Tomsk

Ivanovo

St. Petersburg

Serbia

Bulgaria

South Korea

SingaporeSource: SABER Teachers data.

(2) Practical classroom experience is required duringpre service training for an unspecified time. Teachersin training need opportunities to hone their craft duringpre service training to ensure that their preparation isnot only theory based. The more teachers try out theirpedagogical theories, subject matter knowledge, andclassroom management skills, the better prepared theywill be for their job. Most high performing systemsrequire their teacher entrants to have a considerableamount of classroom experience before becomingindependent teachers, and some of these systemsprovide mentoring and support during the first and evensecond year on the job (Darling Hammond 2010,Ingersoll 2007). In Russia, at least six months of practicalprofessional experience is required for both primary andsecondary school teachers in training, but policies donot stipulate details such as duration of the experience.While incorporating practical experience can be veryuseful, policies need to ensure that teachers receiveadequate practice, guidance, and time for reflection.

Goal 4: Matching teachers’ skills withstudents’ needs

Tomsk EmergingIvanovo LatentSt. Petersburg Latent

Ensuring that teachers work in schools where their skillsare most needed is important for equity and efficiency.First, it is a way of ensuring that teachers are distributedas efficiently as possible, making sure that there are noshortages of qualified teachers in any given grade,

education level, or subject. Second, it is a means ofensuring that all students in a school system have anequal opportunity to learn. Without purposefulallocation systems, it is likely that teachers will gravitatetowards schools serving better off students or located inmore desirable areas which will deepen inequalities inthe system.

SABER Teachers considers two policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) incentives forteachers to work in hard to staff schools; and (2)incentives for teachers to teach in critical shortage areas.

(1) There are mechanisms to address teacher shortagesin hard to staff schools in Tomsk, but not in Ivanovo orSt. Petersburg. Attracting effective teachers to work inhard to staff schools (schools that are in disadvantagedlocations or serve underprivileged populations) is achallenge for many countries, and often requires aspecific set of incentives. In Russia, equitable teacherdeployment is under the authority of the administrativeregions. In Tomsk, St. Petersburg, and Ivanovo, teachersare not assigned or transferred between schools;teachers apply directly to schools for positions. Sinceauthorities do not directly determine the flow of humanresources, incentives are the most relevant toolsavailable to ensure equitable deployment.

In Tomsk, there are policies to encourage teachers towork in hard to staff schools. Teachers in hard to staffschools may receive a higher basic salary, monetarybonuses, scholarships, housing support, travel benefits,and food and beverage benefits. In St. Petersburg andIvanovo, there are no policies to attract teachers to hardto staff schools (Figure 6).

(2) None of the three administrative regions havepolicies to attract teachers to critical shortage subjects.Subjects with too few teachers to meet student needsare present in nearly all education systems. When thereare no policies to manage the number of teachers bysubject, there is an inevitable skill asymmetry betweenthe teacher supply and school needs. Many systemsdevelop policies and offer incentives for teachers toteach these subjects through scholarships, additional payor benefits (such as subsidized education or housingsupport), or career opportunities. Singapore and SouthKorea do not provide special incentives for this purposebut entry to the profession is highly competitive, andadmission is provided based on the subject that



candidates would teach. In Tomsk, Ivanovo, and St.Petersburg, respondents suggested there wereshortages of primary school teachers, foreign languageteachers, and mathematics teachers. However, there areno incentives to attract teachers to areas of need.

The analysis under Goal 2 suggests that, overall, teachingis an attractive profession in Russia, but finerinducements are required to ensure that the profile ofteachers entering the schools is efficient.

Figure 6. Incentives for teachers to teach in hard tostaff schools

Prom

otion

Higher

basic

salary

inhard

tostaffschoo

ls

Mon

etarybo

nus

Subsidize

ded

ucation

Housingsupp

ort

TomskIvanovoSt. PetersburgSerbiaBulgariaSouth KoreaSingapore

Source: SABER Teachers data.Note: Singapore has no specific incentives to attract qualified teachers to hardto staff schools, but it does have a centrally managed teacher deploymentsystem that ensures an equitable and efficient distribution of teachers.

Goal 5: Leading teachers with strongprincipals

Tomsk LatentIvanovo LatentSt. Petersburg Latent

The quality of school heads is an important predictor ofstudent learning. Capable principals can act asinstructional leaders, providing direction and support tothe improvement of instructional practice at the schoollevel. In addition, capable principals can help attract andretain competent teachers.

SABER Teachers considers two policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) the educationsystem’s investment in developing qualified schoolleaders; (2) decision making authority for schoolprincipals to support and improve instructional practice.

(1) In Russia, principals must have a university degreeand complete specific coursework. Research from highperforming education systems suggests principals candevelop leadership skills through supported workexperience or through specific training courses. Highperforming systems such as Japan, South Korea,Shanghai, and Singapore require applicants to principalpositions to participate in specific coursework and/or aspecialized internship or mentoring program aimed atdeveloping essential leadership skills (OECD, 2012;Darling Hammond 2010).

To become a school principal in Russia, a candidate musthave completed five years of teaching. Candidates arealso required to complete a university diploma thatincludes specific courses on governance andmanagement. This is the same education level requiredto become a secondary school teacher but above thatrequired to be a primary school teacher.

Beyond having a good understanding of teaching,effective principals need to be effective managers andschool leaders. An effective way to help develop theabilities of head teachers and principals is throughmentoring programs or on the job training. There are nonational or regional policies requiring or recommendinga systematic induction program for principals.

Given that new principals often lack peers to learn from,programs that allow them to be mentored during theirinitial months by nearby experienced principals, or toreceive increased support from education officers, canhelp principals become more effective. These programsmake it possible for principals to learn good practicesfrom others instead of learning only through their ownexperience. In Bulgaria, recent policy changes created anofficial track for principals to become authorizedmentors. In addition, they offer optional training courseson institutional leadership, conducting teacherevaluations, and leading teacher teams.



Figure 7. Required principal duties related to improvinginstruction

Guidance

for

curriculum

andteaching

relatedtasks

Performance

Evaluatio

ns


Source: SABER Teachers data.

(2) In Russia, principal duties vary betweenmunicipalities, and there is no system wide focus onimproving instruction. Once education systems gettalented candidates to become principals, they need tostructure the principals’ time such that they can focus onimproving teacher instruction (OECD 2012, Barber &Mourshed 2007). High performing education systemssuch as Finland, Ontario, and Singapore think of theirprincipals as instructional leaders, and not simplyadministrators. Effective principals are expected to beknowledgeable in teaching and curriculum matters, andprovide guidance and support to teachers. Effectiveprincipals evaluate teachers, provide feedback, assessthe school’s needs for professional development, anddirect instructional resources where they are mostneeded (Darling Hammond & Rothman 2011).

In Russia, the national standards that define the duties ofprincipals specify management abilities, but do not referspecifically to abilities related to pedagogical leadership(Ministry of Social Development and Health, 2011); theirduties are determined by the local authorities thatemploy them, and not by standard expectations set byregional or national authorities. While some principalsmay be expected to support teachers in somemunicipalities, national or subnational policies andsupport do not exist.

Goal 6: Monitoring teaching and learning


Assessing how well teachers are teaching and whetherstudents are learning is essential for devising strategiesto improve teaching and learning. First, identifying lowperforming teachers and students is critical for educationsystems to be able to provide struggling classrooms withadequate support to improve. Second, teacher andstudent evaluation also helps identify good practiceswhich can be shared across the system to improve schoolperformance.

SABER Teachers considers two policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) adequate systemsto monitor teacher performance; and (2) multiplemechanisms to evaluate teacher performance.

(1) Regional education management officials conductteacher evaluations. As one component of an evaluationsystem, classroom observations can be useful to helpteachers learn how to improve their effectiveness in theclassroom. Evaluation methods vary by region, but allregions require teacher evaluations every five years.There are no national or subnational policies providingguidance on internal evaluations by principals, nor areevaluations records used to track teacher performanceover time.

(2) Evaluations of teacher performance incorporate avariety of perspectives. Research suggests that no singlemethod of evaluating teacher performance is fail safe.Most high performing systems conduct teacherevaluations using a multiplicity of mechanisms, for datacollection and varied criteria for assessment. Ideally, anevaluation system includes a comprehensive teacherevaluation framework that combines student results,teachers’ portfolios, classroom observations andfeedback from students/parents. Internationalexperience and research on the topic suggest that noneof these approaches taken separately can produce abalanced and objective evaluation of teacherperformance.

In Tomsk, Ivanovo, and St. Petersburg, the requiredexternal evaluations include classroom observations,



feedback from principals, and feedback from fellowteachers. By incorporating multiple professionalperspectives, evaluations are more likely to be wellinformed.

In addition to a variety of perspectives, a variety ofcriteria can be useful. In Tomsk, Ivanovo, and St.Petersburg, policies explicitly require that evaluationsconsider teacher subject matter, teaching methods,student assessment methods, and student achievement.Assessment criteria may vary in other administrativeregions.

Figure 8. Criteria to evaluate teacher performance

Subject

matter

know

ledge

Teaching

metho

ds

Stud

ent

assessmen

tmetho

ds

Stud

ents’

academ

icachievem

ent

Tomsk

IvanovoSt.Petersburg

Serbia

Bulgaria

South Korea

SingaporeSource: SABER Teachers data

Goal 7: Supporting teachers to improveinstruction

Tomsk LatentIvanovo EmergingSt. Petersburg Emerging

Support systems are necessary to help improveinstruction at the school level. In order to constantlyimprove instructional practice, teachers and schoolsneed to be able to analyze the specific challenges thatthey face in classroom teaching, have access toinformation on best practices to address thesechallenges, and receive specific external support tailoredto their needs.

SABER Teachers considers three policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) availability ofopportunities for teacher professional development; (2)teacher professional development activities that are

collaborative and focused on instructional improvement;(3) ensuring that teacher professional development isassigned based on perceived needs.

(1) National law stipulates that all teachers are entitledto and required to participate in professionaldevelopment every five years. Recent legislation inRussia rules that teachers are entitled to professionaldevelopment once every three years and are required toparticipate once every five years. Primary schoolteachers are required to attend 72 hours of professionaldevelopment every five years, and secondary schoolteachers are required to attend 108 hours every fiveyears. High performing education systems like Japan andOntario devote as much as 30 per cent of school time toprofessional development and instructionalimprovement activities.

Figure 9. Number of days (or equivalents) of requiredprofessional development, primary school teachers

Unkno

wn/

Und

efined

1to

5days

6to

9days

10or

more

days


Source: SABER Teachers data

(2) Professional development policies include someprofessional development activities known to improvepractice. Research suggests that effective teacherprofessional development is collaborative and providesopportunities for the in school analysis of instructionalpractice. Some high performing countries includeobservation visits to other schools, participation inteacher or school networks as well as opportunities toengage in research, mentoring or coaching. In Russia,schools may be granted the status of a regional site forinnovations or internship. Those schools can host handson seminars and arrange observation lessons. Teacherand school networks, mentoring, and independentresearch are not practiced. These methods have beenshown to be much more likely to result in teachersimproving their practices (Desimone, 2002).



(3) Teacher evaluations can be used to assignprofessional development. Assigning professionaldevelopment to teachers when they score low onperformance evaluations is one way of potentiallyimproving instructional practice. Teacher professionaldevelopment can be targeted to meet the needs ofspecific teachers. In Russia, teacher evaluators can assignteacher specific professional development to strengthentheir abilities. Other systems create strong links betweenprofessional development and perceived needs. SouthKorea has school staff developers whose job is to identifygrowth areas for schools and ensure staff get the trainingthey need. In addition, each South Korean school has afund used to pay for teacher professional development.

Figure 10.Types of professional development

Observatio

nvisits

Teache

rne

tworks

Scho

olne

tworks

Research

Men

torin

g/c

oaching


Source: SABER Teachers data.Note: While South Korea doesn’t incorporate the mentionedmediums as professional development, observation visits, research,and mentoring are built into the qualification programs required forcareer progression.

Goal 8: Motivating teachers to perform


Adequate mechanisms to motivate teachers are a wayfor school systems to signal their seriousness in achievingeducation goals, making the teaching career attractive tocompetent individuals, and rewarding good performancewhile ensuring accountability.

SABER Teachers considers three policy levers that schoolsystems can use to reach this goal: (1) linking careeropportunities to teachers’ performance; (2) having

mechanisms to hold teachers accountable; (3) linkingteacher compensation to performance.

(1) In Russia, promotions but not permanent positions,are informed by performance. Teachers cannot bepromoted without passing external evaluations, whichmay provide motivation for continual improvement. Onecommon challenge of education systems is to balanceteacher stability and accountability. In many systems,once teachers are hired, there is a probation periodduring which underperforming teachers can bedismissed. Russia has no probation period or any otherchannel to dismiss teachers due to poor performance.

(2) There are some mechanisms to hold teachers to aminimum standard of conduct. Requiring teachers tomeet some standards to remain in the teachingprofession can facilitate the removal of ineffectiveteachers. In most high performing systems, teacherperformance is evaluated annually, and there are officialmechanisms to address cases of misconduct, child abuse,absenteeism and poor performance. In Russia, whileteachers can be dismissed for misconduct, child abuse,or absenteeism, there is no mechanism to dismissteachers for poor performance (See Figure 11).

(3) Teacher compensation is linked to teacherperformance. In Russia, teachers cannot be promotedwithout an external performance evaluation. Basingcareer progression on performance can be an effectivetool for improving teacher motivation.

Figure 11. Grounds for dismissal

Misc

ondu

ct

Child

abuse

Absenteeism

Poor

Performance

TomskIvanovoSt. PetersburgSerbiaBulgariaSouth KoreaSingaporeSource: SABER Teachers data.



Policy OptionsThis SABER country report has offered a snapshot ofRussia’s key teacher policies and how they compare withthose of top global performers in education. This sectionsuggests some policy options for further improvement ofthe teacher policy framework. These recommendedmeasures are derived from the above analysis andinterviews conducted in Russia. Policy suggestions areprovided only for the priority areas where level ofperformance is below “established”.

Preparing Teachers with Useful Training andExperienceIt is crucial to equip teachers with subject matter,pedagogic and classroommanagement skills, and a lot ofteaching practice. Russian regulation imposes minimumeducation requirements for primary school teachers.Some options to consider:

Introduce regional best practice benchmarks(standards) for teachers’ preparation thatimpose high requirements for teachers’ preservice education and training (an educationallevel equivalent to ISCED 5A).Provide incentives for future teachers to masterpedagogical and classroom management skillsin real teaching environments.Provide incentives for schools to providepractice opportunities for future teachers.Ensure that policies provide for teachers toreceive adequate guidance and time forreflection, mentoring and support during thefirst several months on the job.

Matching teachers’ skills with students’ needs

Nearly all education systems struggle to attract teachersfor certain specializations or to some subset of schools.Ivanovo and St. Petersburg have no formal policies toaddress teacher shortages in hard to staff schools orsubjects. While regional authorities have used ad hocincentives in the past, there are no formal policies toimprove deployment. Systems where recruitment islargely decentralized require a unique set of policyresponses, given that direct transfers and individualsalaries are not set regionally. Some options would be to:

Provide additional funding for teacher hiring inhard to staff areas.

Monitor the teacher supply systematically to beaware of current shortages and predict futureshortages.Provide visible incentives for teachers to work inhard to staff schools (e.g. faster promotionrates, higher salaries, or increased benefits).Provide differentiated scholarship programs oradmissions standards to attract teachercandidates to subject specializations withshortages.Introduce termed contracts for work inchallenging areas with special salary, promotionand other benefits (e.g. to encourage newgraduates to teach in challenging conditions fora limited period).

Leading teachers with strong principalsPrincipals can have an immense effect on studentoutcomes, but their role in improving education outcomesneeds to be clear and oriented towards instructionalleadership. While there are higher requirements to becomea principal than a teacher in all three regions, the duties ofprincipals aren’t designed to orient principals towardsimproving learning. In Tomsk, there is no official descriptionof principal duties at all. In education systems with a highdegree of local autonomy, the need for clear expectationsand learning opportunities for leadership are even moreimportant. The following measures may help to ensure thatprincipals are oriented towards improving educationoutcomes and have the resources necessary available tothem:

Conduct a needs assessment to betterunderstand the specific needs and issues thatprincipals face in their work.Provide principals with an obligatorymentorship program, instructional leadershiptraining and ongoing professional development.Ensure that principals see professionaldevelopment of teachers and schoolimprovement as their core responsibility.Ensure principal appointments are based onmerit and not entirely on tenure in order toopen a career track to highly effective teachers.Establish “leadership academy” to speed up theprofessional development of school leaders anduse the high status of principals to attract highlyeffective candidates.



Supporting Teachers to Improve Instruction

Two critical components to effective professionaldevelopment are to integrate it as an ongoing part of theprofession, to use professional development methods.While recent legislation requires all teachers attendsome professional development at least every five years,the number of days and types of professionaldevelopment remain limited. Some options to consider:

Build on the recent legislation by offering newmethods of professional development.Facilitating networks of teachers and mentoringare easy to implement ways to encouragesharing of best practices among teachers.Integrate professional development andteacher support through stronger instructionalleadership.Create and facilitate professional networks forpeer learning and sharing good practices.

Greater customization of regional policiesWhile many policies are determined at the regional levelin Russia, there was little measurable variation observedbetween the policies pursued by Tomsk, Ivanovo, and St.Petersburg. Increased knowledge exchange with andbetween regions may help regional governmentscustomize their policies to meet their unique needs.



AcknowledgementsThis report was prepared by the team led by Kirill Vasiliev(Education Specialist, Education Global Practice, WorldBank) and under the direction of Halsey Rogers (LeadEconomist, Education Global Practice, World Bank). Theteam includes Andrew Trembley, principle author(Consultant, Education Global Practice, World Bank), andco authors from the National Research University HigherSchool of Economics (Moscow, Russia) Marina Pinskaya,Pavel Derkachev, and Sergei Kosaretskiy.

For the regional data collection, the team is grateful to:Natalia Zaichenko (Higher School of Economics, SaintPetersburg), Marina Dmitrieva (Institute of EducationSystem Development, Ivanovo oblast), Boris Ilukhin(Center of Education Quality Assessment, Tomsk oblast),Natalia Serbina (Center of Education Quality Assessment,Tomsk oblast), Maya Saveleva (Higher School ofEconomics, Moscow).



ReferencesAttfield, Robin. (2011). “Development of Accreditation

for School Directions: Discussion Paper.”Washington, DC: World Bank.

Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2007).How the World'sBest Performing School Systems Come Out onTop. London, UK: McKinsey & Co.

Campante, F. & Glaeser, E. L. (2009).“Yet Another Tale ofTwo Cities: Buenos Aires and Chicago.” NBERWorking Paper 15104.Cambridge, MA: NationalBureau of Economic Research (NBER).

Chaudhury, N., Hammer, J., Kremer, M., Muralidharan,K., & Rogers, F. H. (2006). "Missing in Action:Teacher and Health Worker Absence inDeveloping Countries." Journal of EconomicPerspectives, 20:1, pp. 91 116.

Darling Hammond, L. (2010). “Steady Work: HowCountries Build Successful Systems.” In DarlingHammond, L. (2010). The Flat World andEducation: How America’s Commitment toEquity Will Determine Our Future. New York, NY:Teachers College.

Darling Hammond, L.; & Rothman, R. (2011). Teacherand leader effectiveness in high performingeducation systems. Washington, DC: Alliance forExcellent Education.

Desimone, L.; Garet, Michael S.; Yoon, Kwan S.; Birman,Beatrice F. (2002). “Effects of ProfessionalDevelopment on Teachers’ Instruction.”Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 24:81 112.

Habyarimana, J. (2007) Characterizing Teacher Absencein Bulgaria: Evidence from 2006 Unit Cost Study.Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Hanushek, E. A., & S. G. Rivkin.(2010). “Generalizationsabout Using Value Added Measures of TeacherQuality.” American Economic Review. 100 (2):267 71.

Hanushek, E. & Woessmann (2007). “Education Qualityand Economic Growth.” Washington, DC: TheWorld Bank.

Hanushek, E. & Woessmann (2009). “Schooling,Cognitive Skills, and the Latin American GrowthPuzzle.” NBERWorking Paper 15066. Cambridge,

MA: National Bureau of Economic Research(NBER).

Herrmann, M. A., & Rockoff, J. E. (2009). "WorkDisruption, Worker Health, and Productivity:Evidence from Teaching." New York, NY:Columbia Business School.

Ingersoll, R. (2007). A comparative study of teacherpreparation and qualifications in six nations.Consortium for Policy Research on Education.

Levin, B. (2008) How to change 5000 schools. Cambridge,MA: Harvard Education Press.

Miller, R. T., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (2008). "DoTeacher Absences Impact Student Achievement?Longitudinal Evidence From One Urban SchoolDistrict." Educational Evaluation and PolicyAnalysis, 30(2): 181 200.

Order of the Russian Ministry of Health and SocialDevelopment (MHSD) No. 761n, August 26,2010. http://www.rg.ru/2010/10/20/teacherdok.html

National Statistical Institute. (2013). “Net Enrollment ofChildren in Kindergartens Table,”http://www.nsi.bg/otrasalen.php?otr=36&a1=1267&a2=1271&a3=1272#cont, Accessed 3 July,2013.

Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. V. (2004)."How Large Are Teacher Effects?" EducationalEvaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(3), 237 257.

OECD. (2009). PISA 2009 Results: What Students Knowand Can Do—Student Performance in ReadingMathematics and Science,http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450 en,Accessed 3 July, 2013.

OECD. (2011.) Building a high quality teaching profession.Lessons from around the world. Paris: OECD.

OECD. (2012). Preparing teachers and developing schoolleaders for the 21st century. Paris: OECDPublishing.

OECD (2013), “Russian Federation”, in Education at aGlance 2013: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing.

Park, A., & Hannum, E. (2001). "Do Teachers AffectLearning in Developing Countries?: Evidencefrom Matched Student Teacher Data fromChina." Paper presented at the ConferenceRethinking Social Science Research on the



Developing World in the 21st Century. Park City,Utah: Social Science Research Council.

PIRLS. (2001). PIRLS International Report,http://timss.bc.edu/pirls2001i/pdf/P1_IR_Ch01.pdf, Accessed 3 July, 2013.

Pritchett, L. & Viarengo,M. (2009).“Producing Superstarsfor the Economic Mundial: The MexicanPredicament with Quality of Education. PEPGWorking Paper 09 01.Cambridge, MA: Programon Education Policy and Governance (PEPG).

Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F.(2005)."Teachers, Schools and StudentAchievement." Econometrica, 73(2), 417 458.

Rockoff, J. E. (2004). "The Impact of Individual Teacherson Student Achievement: Evidence from PanelData." American Economic Review, 94(2), 247252.

Rogers, F. H., & Vegas, E. (2009). "NoMore Cutting Class?Reducing Teacher Absence and ProvidingIncentives for Performance." Policy ResearchWorking Paper 4847. Washington, DC: TheWorld Bank.

Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996)."Cumulative andResidual Effects of Teachers on Future StudentAcademic Achievement." Research ProgressReport. Knoxville, TN: University of TennesseeValue Added Research and Assessment Center.

Vegas, E., et al. (2012) What matters most in teacherpolicies? A framework for building a moreeffective teaching profession. Washington, DC:The World Bank.



Annex 1. SABER Teachers RatingsThe SABER Teachers team has identified policy levers(actions that governments can take) and indicators(which measure the extent to which governments aremaking effective use of these policy levers) for each ofthe eight policy goals referenced in this country report.For example, for Teacher Policy Goal 1, Setting ClearExpectations for Teachers, the SABER Teachers team hasidentified the following policy levers and indicators:

Table 2. Setting Clear Expectations for Teachers

For each goal in the country report, we define the goal inthe first paragraph of the country report, identify thelevers in the second paragraph, and the remainingparagraphs are used to provide details about theindicators that measure each of the levers.

Using the policy levers and indicators, SABER Teachersclassifies education systems’ performance on each of theeight teacher policy goals using a four category scale(latent, emerging, established, and advanced), whichdescribes the extent to which a given education systemhas in place teacher policies that are known to be relatedto improved student outcomes.

This four tiered rating system represents a continuumfrom systems with more comprehensive, developedpolicies oriented toward learning to systems with nopolicies at all (or, in some cases, policies that aredetrimental from the perspective of encouraginglearning). SABER Teacher ratings can be defined in thefollowing manner:

Advanced—Systems that are rated “advanced”toward a particular policy goal are those thathave multiple policies conducive to learning inplace under each of the policy levers used todefine a policy goal.

Established—“Established” systems are thosethat have at least one policy/law in place thatuses those policy levers.

Emerging—“Emerging” systems may have onlysome appropriate policies in place under thepolicy goal.

Latent—“Latent” systems are those that havenone or few. Please refer to Vegas et al. 2012 fora detailed review of policy levers and indicatorsassessed for each goal.

Please reference the Vegas et al. (2012) backgroundpaper, “What matters most for teacher policies? Aframework for building a more effective teachingprofession,” for more details about these definitions anda detailed review of policy levers and indicators used bySABER Teachers.



The Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER) initiativeproduces comparative data and knowledge on education policies andinstitutions, with the aim of helping countries systematically strengthentheir education systems. SABER evaluates the quality of educationpolicies against evidence based global standards, using new diagnostictools and detailed policy data. The SABER country reports give all partieswith a stake in educational results—from administrators, teachers, andparents to policymakers and business people—an accessible, objectivesnapshot showing how well the policies of their country's educationsystem are oriented toward ensuring that all children and youth learn.

This report focuses specifically on policies in the area of teacher policies.

This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusionsexpressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or thegovernments they represent. TheWorld Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries,colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of TheWorld Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.

www.worldbank.org/education/saber

saber teachers russia cr final 2014 - world...

Documents