During the last decades the improvement of school effectiveness is emerging objective of education reform strategies around the world. Increasing emphasis on academic performance gives new importance to investigating factors that contribute to student achieving. While there is a wide literature about complexity of quality and effectiveness of education, the most prevalent analytical approach measure quality of schools and teachers on the base of students’ performance or test results. However, efficiency cannot be observed directly. Students’ achievement is determined by individual characteristics which are not affected by school; and characteristics of school may be affected by individual decision of parents (parents choosing school/class for kids) and institutional selection (school may assign pupils and teachers to specific school/classes on the basis of explicit or implicit rules). Consequently, measurement of efficiency must be controlled both for the individual characteristics (value added measurement) and the hierarchical effect of school/class level characteristics.

Previous analyses show that student achievement is determined both by individual characteristics and the school resources (including the quantity and quality of teachers) and also the efficiency with which those resources are used. The findings reveal that the substantial proportion of the variation in student achievement lies within schools not between schools. There is also considerable between-school variation in achievement. Last but not least, previous studies show that of the factors controlled by the school system, teacher effectiveness is the most promising in explaining academic achievement.

 Impact of teachers’ characteristics on students’ achievement are usually measured by more easily detectible factors like age/duration of practice or education level, formal teacher training, participation in training courses, subject matter knowledge, etc.  Only a few studies attempted to examine the impact of teaching practice or attitudes which are more complex and difficult to measure like teacher group coherence; consensus on teaching objectives and methods; high expectations towards students; teaching practices, attitudes and beliefs; as well as teachers appraisal and feedback. Recent studies reveal importance of beliefs about the nature of teaching and learning as well as classroom teaching practice. School climate also seems to be an important determinant of school effectiveness.

Summarizing, there is no doubt that teachers who differ in effectiveness, deeply influence student scores and school added value – „teachers matter”. However it is not yet clear which specific teacher characteristics explain differences in school effectiveness that is measured by student achievement.

Our study aims to analyze the effect of teachers’ features on school effectiveness, based on the linked data of Hungarian Teacher Panel Survey conducted in 2013 (and 2014) and of National Assessment of Basic Competencies, Hungary. While our analysis is based on data of a single country, our main research questions and results are more universal: What factors of teachers and teaching can effect students’ achievement and school effectiveness? More specifically:

• What extent can teachers contribute to the school effectiveness measured by student academic achievement?
• Do teachers and schools significantly vary in improving student academic achievement?
• Can these differences be explained by the characteristics of teachers?
• Especially:
  • Does teachers’ continuous professional development effect on students’ achievement?
  • How does teachers’ cooperation affect students’ achievement?
  • Does teachers’ attitudes towards school climate effect on students’ achievement?
• Is there any difference between teacher/school level determinants of absolute scores of students’ achievement and that of added value of school?

According to our theoretical approach, our main hypothesis is that students’ achievement is effected both by a teachers individual characteristics as well as the joint school environment of teachers’ community and school board. Our second hypothesis is that the effect of these features is stronger on added value of schools than in absolute scores.

BRATTI, M.–CHECCHI, D. (2013): Re-testing PISA Students One Year Later: On School Value Added Estimation Using OECD-PISA. IZA Discussion Paper No. 7722 BONESRONNING, H. (2004): Can effective teacher behaviour be identified? Economics of Education Review 23 (2004) pp. 237–247. COHEN, J. et al. (2009): School Climate: Research, Policy, Practice and Teacher Education. Teachers College Record, Vol. 111, No. 1, pp. 180–213. DARLING-HAMMOND, L. (1999): Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence. Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy. University of Washington. DARLING-HAMMOND–L., HOLTZMAN, D. J.–GATLIN, S. J.–HEILIG, J. V. (2005): Does teacher preparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, Teach for America, and teacher effectiveness. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42). HANUSHEK, E. A.–RIVKIN, S. G.–KAIN, J. F. (2005): Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement. Econometrica, 73 2, 417-458. KIM, H.–LALANCETTE, D (2013): Literature Review on the Value-Added Measurement. AHELO feasybility study. Paris: OECD Publications. KONIEWSKI, M. (2014): Estimating teacher effect using hierarchical linear modeling. Edukacja, 5(130), pp. 70–91 MOURSHED, M.–CHIJIOKE, CH.–BARBER, M. (2010): How the world's most improved school systems keep getting better. McKinsey & Company. OECD (2005): Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and Retaining. OECD Publishing, Paris. OECD (2008): Measuring Improvements in Learning Outcomes: Best Practices to Assess the Value-Added of Schools. OECD Publishing. OECD (2009): Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS. OECD Publishing, Paris. OECD (2010): Review on Evaluation and Assessment Frameworks for Improving School Outcomes. Country Background Report, Hungary. OECD (2013): Teachers for the 21st Century: Using Evaluation to Improve Teaching, OECD Publishing, Paris. OECD (2014): PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do – Student Performance in Mathematics, Reading and Science (Volume I, Revised edition, February 2014). PISA, OECD Publishing. PETERSON, P.L.–FENNEMA, E–CARPENTER, T.P.–LOEF, M. (1989): Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Beliefs in Mathematics”, Cognition and Instruction, No. 6 (1), pp. 1–40. RAUDENBUSH, S. W.–BRYK, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. ROCKOFF, J. E. (2004): The Impact of Individual Teachers on Student Achievement: Evidence from Panel Data. The American Economic Review, Vol. 94, No. 2 (May), pp. 247-252. SCHEERENS, J.–R.J. BOSKER (1997): The Foundations of Educational Effectiveness, Pergamon, Oxford. WENGLINSKY, H. (2002): How schools matter: The link between teacher classroom practices and student academic performance. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(12).