CSUCL Educational Forum on school instruction features Dr. Richard Lemons

March 29, 2010

As part of its mission to add to the scholarship of the university and improve best practices in education and school leadership, the CSUCL hosts regular educational forums on campus at Rutgers–Camden.  The Center invites noted scholars and researchers in academia from across the country to share their research and innovative practices. 

Continuing its 2009-2010 series, on Friday, March 26th the Center welcomed Dr. Richard Lemons to campus to discuss “Defining High Quality Instruction and Organizing Your School for Achieving Success”.  Dr. Lemons, the Vice President for Program and Policy at The Education Trust, is a former director of the Institute for Urban School Improvement at the University of Connecticut and a former high school teacher. 

In an engaging presentation on school instruction, Dr. Lemons spoke to members of the Rutgers–Camden community as well as participants from Camden City in the CSUCL’s School Leaders Academy and MPA Cohort for Aspiring School Leaders. 

Using video examples of actual classroom instruction, Dr. Lemons and participants engaged in group discourse and examined the problem of variation in assessing “good” instruction.  “Teacher quality and effectiveness have a powerful impact on learning, achievement and attainment,” Dr. Lemons said. 

His discussion emphasized the critical nature of the teacher–student relationship and how they interact, collectively and individually, with the lesson content.  “The problem of change is the problem of the smallest unit: the interaction of adults and children as it relates to instruction,” Dr. Lemons said, paraphrasing a 1998 article by Milbrey McLaughlin. 

However, Dr. Lemons explained that there is rarely a clear consensus on what high quality instruction is.  For example, when observers were asked to grade the level of instruction shown on one video (‘A’ the highest, ‘F’ the lowest), response data revealed a classic bell curve distribution.  The majority of participants graded between ‘B’ and ‘C’ but there were enough outlying scores to prohibit any kind of unanimity. 

Dr. Lemons said this goes to the heart of the problem when assessing good teachers and good instruction: “We don’t always know what it looks like.”

He explained that teacher quality and effectiveness have the largest impact on student learning and, if channeled effectively by administrators, could end the divide.  “If a [typical low-income] student had a good teacher as opposed to an average one for four to five years in a row, the increased learning would be sufficient to close entirely the achievement gap,” he said. 

In addition, Dr. Lemons offered research on the impact that high quality instruction (or the lack of it) can have on low-income, minority students.  “The impact of access to an effective teacher is higher, on average, for a poor student or student of color,” he said, adding that access to strong teachers is disproportionate, with more low-income or minority students learning from inexperienced or out-of-field teachers than in higher income, low minority schools. 

This forum was the second hosted by the Center this year; last semester’s session focused on strategies for school effectiveness and invited author Karin Chenoweth to Rutgers–Camden to speak about urban education.  Chenoweth, who works with Dr. Lemons at The Education Trust, is the author of two books and a former education columnist for The Washington Post. 

For two days in November, Chenoweth offered successful examples of ways that some high-poverty, high-minority populated schools have managed to improve student achievement and proficiency, despite their economic deficiencies.