![headshot of dr. heather hill](https://leadingeducators.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/770x385-UK-HHill-e1624987547626.png)
![headshot of dr. heather hill](https://leadingeducators.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/770x385-UK-HHill-e1624987547626.png)
About Heather Hill
Heather C. Hill studies policies and programs designed to improve mathematics teacher and teaching quality. Her recent research focuses on: teacher professional development, instructional coaching, teacher evaluation, changes over time in teachers' mathematical knowledge and instructional quality in mathematics, and the teacher experiences and characteristics that lead to high-quality instruction and stronger student outcomes.
Hill and her team have developed assessments that capture teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching and teachers' mathematical quality of instruction, assessments now widely available to researchers, instructional coaches, evaluators, and policy-makers via online training and administrative systems.
Hill is a fellow of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), and serves on the AERA grants board, on the editorial boards of several journals, and as an advisor to numerous research projects and policy efforts in both the U.S. and abroad. She is co-author of Learning Policy: When State Education Reform Works with David K. Cohen (Yale Press, 2001).
Hill and her team have developed assessments that capture teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching and teachers' mathematical quality of instruction, assessments now widely available to researchers, instructional coaches, evaluators, and policy-makers via online training and administrative systems.
Hill is a fellow of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), and serves on the AERA grants board, on the editorial boards of several journals, and as an advisor to numerous research projects and policy efforts in both the U.S. and abroad. She is co-author of Learning Policy: When State Education Reform Works with David K. Cohen (Yale Press, 2001).
"Understanding students’ weaknesses is only useful if it changes practice. And, to date, evidence suggests that it does not change practice — or student outcomes. Focusing on the problem has likely distracted us from focusing on the solution."