Allan A. Glatthorn
Distinguished Research Professor
School of Education
East Carolina University

April 1997

I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to three colleagues who assisted in the study. Charles Coble first indicated the need for the study and provided useful suggestions for its direction. Dan Shouse, reference librarian at the Joyner Library of East Carolina University, provided substantial assistance in the information retrieval process. Marilyn Sheerer, chair of the Elementary/Middle Grades Department in the School of Education at East Carolina University, provided very helpful input about the form and content of a master's degree for elementary teachers. However, I should emphasize that I assume full responsibility for any errors or distortions.

I should also acknowledge my biases. As a professor of education, I have a vested interest in affirming the need for graduate study for teachers. As a consultant for staff development for more than 300 school systems, I also have a vested interest in school-based and district-based staff development programs. I have taken pains to ensure that neither of those biases has influenced the work that follows; I will let readers determine if I have been successful.

Allan A. Glatthorn

1.	Executive Summary
2.	Is graduate study associated with teacher effectiveness?
3.	Why is continued professional development essential for teachers?
4.	Should teachers' professional development be accomplished through graduate study or staff development? Figure 1. Comparison of graduate study and staff development
5.	Why do teachers pursue graduate study?
6.	Do teachers perceive that graduate study is helpful? Figure 2. Testimony from a teacher
7.	What are current trends in graduate study by teachers?
8.	Can the benefits of graduate study be achieved without completing the master's degree?
9.	What recommendations are offered to policy makers? Figure 3. Example of graduate program designed for classroom teachers
10.	Methodology for the review
	References
	Deans' Council on Teacher Education

The following conclusions were drawn from a search of the literature on the relationship of graduate study and teacher effectiveness. Graduate study has been tentatively shown to be related to measures of teacher effectiveness. Experts agree that continued professional development is essential for all teachers throughout their careers. Such professional development can be accomplished both through graduate study and school-sponsored staff development, which are seen as complementary approaches. Teachers report that they enroll in graduate courses both for professional and financial reasons. They believe that graduate study is helpful in fostering their professional growth. However, teacher enrollment in graduate programs is declining. Completing an advanced degree program is believed to be more beneficial than simply enrolling in courses. The report concludes with three recommendations for policy-makers: increase incentives for completing master's degree programs; encourage state universities to develop inter-disciplinary graduate programs; provide the incentives and support for university-school collaboratives.

This question can be answered in the affirmative only tentatively, since a comprehensive search of the literature yielded few studies that dealt directly with the issue. For details of the search process, see the Methodology section. The results of these limited number of studies do not necessarily indicate a causal relationship. Other factors, such as commitment to education, may lie behind each phenomenon.

Knoblock (1986) reported in a doctoral dissertation at Western Michigan University that teachers enrolled in graduate programs were judged to be more effective than those not so enrolled. This conclusion was derived from measures of student results on an achievement test and by responses on an evaluative instrument.

A study by Ferguson (1991) found that experience and master's degrees were measures of teacher quality that predict higher test scores for children. However, he found that the master's degree had no predictive power related to student achievement after the seventh grade.

The Ferguson study cited above was reinforced by the findings of a study entitled, "The Effect of School Resources on Student Achievement" (Greenwald, Hedges and Laine, 1996). Their research determined that one would expect substantial increases in student achievement if resources were targeted to selecting (or retaining) more educated or more experienced teachers.

Another study examined the relationship of educators' educational level and student drop-out rate (Sanders, Skonie-Hardin, Phelps, & Minnis, 1994). This study concluded that students of teachers with advanced degrees or certification were less likely to drop out of school than those who had teachers with lower levels of education.

Given the scarcity of empirical evidence regarding earned graduate degrees and student achievement, the remainder of this paper explores related issues that can provide some guidance to policy makers about the value of teacher development.

Professional development is used in this paper to denote the following:
The professional growth that takes place in the educator as a result of continued experience, systematic study, and other related processes.

The simple and direct answer to this question has been best provided by Fullan (1992), an expert in school reform, who advances this proposition:

...teacher education is a matter of life-long learning, starting before one enters teacher pre-service (probationary period) and continuing throughout one's career.... (p. 114)

Such continuing professional development, experts contend, should focus generally on the development of teachers' knowledge. In examining the differences between novice and experienced teachers, researchers have determined that experienced teachers operate from a deeper and more sophisticated knowledge base. (Berliner, 1987).

Perhaps the best analysis of teachers' knowledge is that provided by Shulman (1987) who identifies seven types of knowledge acquired by experienced teachers:

• content knowledge (knowing genetics, for example);

• pedagogical content knowledge (knowing how to make genetics understandable and interesting to young adolescents);

• general pedagogical knowledge (knowing strategies for managing student behavior);

• curriculum knowledge (knowing the content of the district and state curricula);

• knowledge of learners and their characteristics;

• knowledge of educational contexts (knowing how schools and classrooms work);

• knowledge of educational aims, values, and their philosophical and historical grounds.

Both content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge have been shown to be essential for teaching effectiveness. (See Grossman, 1991.)

Other experts in the field have emphasized varied foci for teachers' professional development, including the following. (The list is not intended to be either exhaustive or prescriptive, and only selected sources are noted for each).

• The changing family and the special needs of children. (Katz, 1991; Pallas, Natriello, & McDill, 1995).

• New knowledge of human development. (Sigel, 1990)

• Multiculturalism and student diversity. (Abi-Nader, 1993).

• New and more effective methods of teaching. (Elmore, Peterson, & McCarthey, 1996).

• Problem-solving strategies for improving schools. (Joyce & Showers, 1995).

• The problems and possibilities of teacher leadership. (Wasley, 1991).

• Improvement of student learning. (Renyi, 1996).

• The teacher's role in curriculum. (Glatthorn, 1997).

• Technology and schooling. (Meyrowitz, 1996).

There is clearly widespread disagreement as to what content should be emphasized in professional development programs; however, there is general agreement that continuing professional development is essential for all teachers.

If it seems obvious that continued professional development is essential for effective teaching, then the next issue to be considered is whether that development should be accomplished through graduate study at the university or through staff development at the district or the school. (Staff development is used here to denote the training provided to groups of educators by school systems.)

The evidence suggests clearly that a combination of graduate study and staff development would be most productive for teachers. As Figure 1 indicates, the two systems complement each other. Each has advantages that the other lacks, and each has its own special problems.

Studies suggest that teachers pursue graduate study chiefly for two reasons: enhancing their professional knowledge; and receiving additional salary. In the national survey conducted by Renyi (1996), 73 per cent of those surveyed reported that their chief motivation was improving student achievement. In the California study by Little and colleagues (1987), the reason cited most often by teachers was "access to new ideas and materials" (69.3 per cent); the reason reported next most often was "credit on the salary schedule" (38.7 per cent).

Several studies indicate that in general teachers believe that graduate study fosters their professional growth. Teachers in the Greene and Purvis (1995) study reported that graduate studies had a positive influence on their view of teaching, although they also noted that their colleagues seemed to resent their new knowledge. Both the teachers and the principals surveyed by Monahan (1993) believed that advanced graduate study was one of the best ways for teachers to develop professionally. Teachers in the study by Regan-Smith (1994) reported that advanced graduate study contributed towards their professional growth. (Figure 2 is a letter from a teacher reflecting on the value of graduate study.)

I was thinking about our discussion of my graduate school "experience", and what I gained from earning my master's degree in education. During the time I attended the University, I developed a sense of pride in my profession that I had not previously felt. Even with my limited teaching experience, I had already begun to develop a poor self-image of myself as an educator. I felt that our "society" saw me as a down-trodden, worn out baby-sitter of children, who probably went to college and chose education as the easiest route to a degree. I know this was not some form of neurosis on my part, because I have come to know many teachers in the past 12 years, and I know this feeling lives on in many of them today.

In graduate school, I began to see the connections between theory and practice. As an undergraduate, I remember viewing theoreticians, their ideas and research with some disdain because I could not see their relevance to my situation, nor did I have any conceptual framework of teaching based on experience. As a graduate student I saw the need for research, and theories of education held meaning for me as I was able to connect those ideas to real life experiences I was having in my classroom. This is not to say that I believed everything I read or was told. One of the most valuable things I learned in graduate school was to listen and read with discernment, evaluate and analyze information, and finally to synthesize those ideas into my work by creating a classroom organized around my vision.

I worked collaboratively with other teachers in many of my graduate school courses and this allowed me to begin networking among my peers - building relationships that would enhance my professional growth. I have maintained contact with many of these teachers throughout the years, and these relationships are still important to me. Our families complain and joke about us good naturedly when we get together, because it is virtually impossible to have two or more educators in a group and not have the conversation dominated by talk of "school"!

All of these factors played a role in shaping my career after I left graduate school. I had developed a new self-confidence in myself and my profession. I was even determined not to look like a "schoolteacher"!

Since that time, I have tried to present an image to the public that says, "Yes, I am a teacher, but I am not down-trodden, worn out or poor in spirit. I am a professional educator, who is continually striving to learn more about my field of study."

I view my graduate work as an invaluable experience. It required a lot of sacrifice from me, physically, emotionally, and monetarily. I was teaching during the day, waitressing and going to school at night. There were times when I thought to myself, "Is this really worth it?" I believed then, as I do now, that it was very much worth the sacrifices I made. I emerged from graduate school with a new respect for myself and my profession, as well as a deep commitment to life-long learning.

Nancy J. Proctor
Conn Elementary School, Wake County Schools
(used with permission)

Recent studies indicate that teachers' enrollment in graduate courses is declining: Little (1992) reports a steady fifteen-year decline in such enrollments. In her study, only one teacher in three was enrolled in graduate courses. In a related article she attributes the decline to three factors (Little, 1990). The first is the fact that many teachers have reached the top of the salary schedule and are thus not motivated by financial incentives to do graduate study. The second factor is the proliferation of district-sponsored programs that award semester-hour equivalents to those participating. The final factor is the increasing expense of graduate study, along with fewer subsidies for such study. One additional factor has been noted in What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future (the 1996 report of the National Commission on Teaching & America's Future); the authors believe that the marked discontinuity between graduate courses and the classroom realities faced by teachers also accounts for the decline.

Given the small number of studies of the benefits of the master's degree, this review has examined the broader issue of graduate study. The question therefore remains as to whether the significant benefits of graduate study can be achieved without completing the master's degree. Here there is no evidence. However, there are some obvious benefits in completing a degree program that are not available to the teacher who is simply taking courses.

• The degree program is more likely to constitute a coherent program, rather than a random collection of courses.

• The degree program is more likely to include courses that are beneficial without simply appealing to teachers' passing interest. Thus, most degree programs require the teacher to complete a course in educational research, an area that teachers might avoid if left to their own devices.

• The advanced degree represents a long-term goal that is more likely to maintain the teacher's interest in graduate courses.

• The degree program is usually marked by a closer relationship between faculty and students. Faculty seem to feel a greater responsibility to students enrolled in a degree program.

This synthesis of the literature leads to the following recommendations for policy-makers in North Carolina.

1. Policy-makers should encourage state universities to develop advanced master degree programs that respond to teachers' needs for professional development. Such programs, including interdisciplinary master's studies, should be developed with substantial involvement of teachers and school administrators. An example of such a program is shown in Figure 3, simply as an illustration.
   

2. Policy-makers should provide the incentives and support for the development of university-school collaboratives. Such partnerships are more likely to make optimal use of resources and to respond to the needs of schools. These partnerships would also facilitate cooperative planning by universities and school systems, in designing advanced master degrees and other programs of professional development. (See Renyi, 1996.)
   

3. In order to increase teachers' enrollments in graduate programs, the state legislature should increase the financial incentive for achieving the master's degree. In order to motivate teachers to develop expertise in their own field of study and to encourage able teachers to remain in the classroom, the incentive should apply only to those taking a significant number of courses in the related field of study. (For teachers in elementary schools, "related field" would include child development and learning or a subject field.)
   
   

The following data bases were searched: ERIC; PsychLIT, Dissertation Abstracts International; ProQuest; Social Sciences Index. The following descriptors were used to conduct the search. First, these basic terms were identified: teacher effectiveness; teaching skill; teacher development; teacher competencies; teacher qualifications; staff development. These were coupled with the following descriptors: master's degree; graduate study.

Abi-Nader, J. (1993). Meeting the needs of multicultural classrooms: Family values and the motivation of minority students. In O'Hair, J. J. & Odell, S. J. (Eds.), Diversity and teaching: Teacher education yearbook 1 (pp. 212-228). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Berliner, D. C. (1987). Ways of thinking about students and classrooms by more and less experienced teachers. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers' thinking (pp. 60-83). London: Cassell.

Elmore, R. F., Peterson, P. L., & McCarthey, S. J. (1996). Restructuring in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and school organization. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Ferguson, R. F. (1991). Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why money matters. Harvard Journal of Legislation, 28, 465-498

Fullan, M. G. (1992). Successful school improvement. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Glatthorn, A. A. (1997). The principal as curriculum leader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Greene, M. L. & Purvis, C. R. (1995). The forgotten link: Transitions from graduate school to classroom teaching. Alberta Journal of Education, 41. 213-230.

Greenwald, R., Hedges, L. V., & Laine, R. D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66, 361-396.

Grossman, P. (1991). Mapping the terrain: Knowledge growth in teaching. In H. C. Waxman & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Effective teaching: Current research (pp. 203-216). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1995). Student achievement through staff development: Fundamentals of school renewal (2d ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Katz, L. G. (1991). Pedagogical issues in early childhood education. In S. L. Kagan (Ed.), The care and education of America's young children: Obstacles and opportunities: Ninetieth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 50-68). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Knoblock, G. A. (1986). Continuing professional education for teachers and its relationship to teacher effectiveness. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(02), 3325A, (University Microfilms No. AAC 8529729)

Little, J. W. (1990). Conditions of professional development in secondary schools. In M. W. McLaughlin & J. E. Talbert (Eds.), The contexts of teaching in secondary schools (pp. 187-223). New York: Teachers College Press.

Little, J. W. (1992). Teacher development and educational policy. In M. Fullan & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teacher development and educational change (pp. 170-193). Washington DC: Falmer.

Little, J. W., Gerritz, W. H., Stern, D. S., Guthrie, J. W., Kirst, M. W., & Marsh, D. D. (1987). Staff development in California. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.

Meyrowitz, J. (1996). Taking McLuhan and "medium theory" seriously: Technological change and the evolution of education. In S. T. Kerr (Ed.), Technology and the future of schooling: Ninety-fifth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 73-110). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Monahan, T. C. (1993, February). Teacher-principal agreement of perceptions and expectations for professional development. Paper presented at annual meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Clearwater FL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 370 221)

National Commission on Teaching & America's Future. (1996). What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future. New York: National Commission on Teaching & America's Future.

Pallas, A. M., Natriello, G., & McDill, E. L. (1995). Changing students/changing needs. In E. Flaxman & A. H. Passow (Eds.), Changing populations changing schools: Ninety-fourth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 30-58). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Regan-Smith, M. G. (1994). Graduate school as a professional development experience. Journal of Staff Development, 15 (3), 54-57.

Renyi, J. (1996). Teachers take charge of their learning: Transforming professional development for student success. Washington, DC: National Foundation for the Improvement of Education.

Sanders, S. L., Skonie-Hardin, S. D., Phelps, W. H., & , T. L. (1994, November). The effects of teacher educational attainment on student educational attainment in four regions of Virginia: Implications for administrators. Paper presented at annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 386 455)

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57. 1-22.

Sigel, I. E. (1990). What teachers need to know about human development. In D. Dill and associates (Eds.), What teachers need to know (pp. 76-93). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Wasley, P. A. (1991). Teachers who lead: The rhetoric of reform and the realities of practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

---