Do Traditionally Certified Teachers Really Have Better Curriculum Leadership Than Alternatively Certified Teachers? Based on an Empirical Study in China

Abstract

With the gradual improvement of open teacher selection mechanisms, the comparison of traditionally and alternatively certified teachers has become one of the international focuses in teacher research. Current studies have compared teachers of different certification pathways from multidimensional perspectives; however, no study has yet compared the differences in curriculum leadership between the two types of teachers. Teacher curriculum leadership is the ability of teachers to collaborate with stakeholders in the curriculum area to promote curriculum optimization and the development of students and teachers, and it includes three dimensions: teachers’ curriculum leadership views, practices and identity. This study conducted a comparative analysis of the curriculum leadership of traditionally and alternatively certified teachers based on data from 9,068 teachers of 20 provinces in China. Independent samples t-test and multiple linear regression analysis revealed no significant differences between traditionally and alternatively certified teachers on the overall level of curriculum leadership and the three sub-dimensions of curriculum leadership views, practices, and identity. Theoretically, it provides new evidence for the debate about whether there are differences between the two types of teachers by further corroborating the conclusion that there is no significant difference in the educational effectiveness of traditionally and alternatively certified teachers. Practically, it justifies the rationality of an open teacher selection mechanism and points the way to further reforms in university teacher education.