Smart teachers, successful students? A systematic review of the literature on teachers’ cognitive abilities and teacher effectiveness

By Lisa Bardach, Robert M. Klassen. Educational Research and Reviews, 2019

140 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This study provides a systematic review of the literature on teachers’ cognitive abilities (intelligence test scores and proxies of cognitive abilities such as college entrance exam scores and basic skills test scores) and teacher effectiveness. Twenty-seven studies conducted between 2000 and 2019 constitute the sample for this review. Studies using intelligence test scores were rare, with the results indicating no or negative associations with teacher effectiveness. Studies on proxies of cognitive abilities yielded, at most, small positive relations with teacher effectiveness. However, behind these overall results regarding proxies of cognitive abilities lie interesting heterogeneities, as several studies analyzing different test domains uncover a differentiated pattern of findings. We also identify key limitations related to construct measurement, sampling approaches, statistical analyses and the interpretation and reporting of the included studies, and outline a path for future research on teachers’ cognitive abilities and teacher effectiveness.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/60126d56e034e0725d2fb6fc2e4ec724c90b6963

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Teachers’ Psychological Characteristics: Do They Matter for Teacher Effectiveness, Teachers’ Well-being, Retention, and Interpersonal Relations? An Integrative Review (2021, background): “…solely based on their cognitive attributes as assessed by college entrance exam test scores or intelligence tests is not very promising (e.g., Bardach & Klassen, 2020; D’Agostino & Powers, 2009), suggesting that we should consider broader approaches to selection that could also include…”