Does Teacher Professional Development Improve Student Learning? Evidence from Leading Educators’ Fellowship Model

Studies that demonstrate how educator professional development improves teaching quality and student learning are all too rare (Hill et al., 2021). That’s why a new peer-reviewed study on Leading Educators’ work matters.

The study, published in the Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness in September 2024, reveals statistically significant positive increases in student ELA and math proficiency in three multi-city regions as a result of Leading Educators’ fellowship models. The increases continued for two years after programming concluded.

The researchers examined the long-term student effects of a cohort-based professional development approach designed to bridge research and practice.

What the Researchers Found

Relying on quasi-experimental methods for causal inference, the researchers found that a school’s participation in Leading Educators’ content-specific fellowship program increased student proficiency rates on both math and ELA state achievement exams, both during and after the program.

Finding 1: ELA Achievement Improved During the Program and Continued for Two Years

• For ELA, we find that student proficiency rates improved by 7.6% points two years after the first year of treatment. Marginally significant improvements of 4.5 and 7.8% points, respectively, occurred during the first year and three years after the fellowship began.
• The effect one year after the fellowship began (5.4% points) is qualitatively the same as the ELA effect during the first year of the fellowship.
• ELA effects were more significant in magnitude and more durable than math effects. Potential explanations are provided in the full report.

💡 Takeaway: This suggests that coherent professional learning for leaders across a system can impact student learning in the year it occurs and in the years following.

Finding 2: Math Achievement Improved During the Program and Continued for Two Years

• The post-treatment effects show positive and statistically significant improvements in math proficiency of 6.6% points 1 year after the first year of treatment and marginally significant improvements of 4.6% points 2 years later.
• The greatest change in math occurred 2 and 3 years after the first year of treatment, corresponding with the introduction of content-specific educator professional development into the fellowship program (i.e., the 2016–2017 school year).

💡 Takeaway: This suggests that content-specific instructional development leads to student learning gains.

Finding 3: Leadership Alignment Matters

• When LEA-level leaders enrolled alongside school-level leaders, the pooled treatment effects are positive and significantly larger (0.12) for ELA but not math.
• The year-specific effects show significant effects across all four years in ELA and one year after the first year of fellowship in math when LEA leaders enroll alongside school fellows.

💡 Takeaway: These results support the idea that instructional alignment between schools and LEAs matters and could be key to the sustainability of program effects.

About the Model

During the 2015–2016 and 2016–2017 school years, Leading Educators provided two cohorts of instructional leaders, such as department chairs, mentor teachers, instructional coaches, and assistant principals, with ongoing, collaborative, job-embedded professional development focused on strengthening their instructional leadership.

• These leaders would then lead content-specific professional learning and coaching at their school sites for peers in alignment with college and career readiness standards.
• By expanding distributed leadership and the overall dosage of support for instructional practice development, we aimed to increase the consistency of teaching quality across classrooms and strengthen student mastery of learning objectives.

⚡ Bottom Line: Taken together, this paper’s findings should inform professional learning organizations, schools, and policymakers about the design, implementation, and impact of educator professional development. These findings signal the potential value of more systemic approaches to ongoing professional learning focused on standards and content.