Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Impact of a Summer Institute and Instructional Coaching on Teacher and Student Science Inquiry
Gwen Nugent, Gina Kunz, Jon Pedersen, James Houston, Soon Chun Lee, Irina Kalutskaya,
ChaoRong Wu
CSI: Coaching Science Inquiry in Rural Schools
• CSI is a research study conducted by the National Center for Research on Rural Education (R2Ed) at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
– Funded by the U.S. Department of Education
– Key PD element is technology-delivered coaching
– Randomized controlled trial
– Involves 124 middle/high school rural teachers from 109 schools
CSI Research Study Research Question
What is the impact of professional development on guided scientific inquiry with follow-up coaching (treatment) versus no professional development (control) on (a) teacher inquiry knowledge, skills, self-efficacy, and beliefs and (b) student inquiry knowledge, skills, engagement and science attitudes?
Summer Institute
• 8-day workshop in Lincoln using evidence-based strategies
– Modeling by faculty, expert teachers, and coaches with commentary
– Teacher practice of new skills
– Feedback from coaches, peers, and faculty
• Teachers provided with 6 – 8 week inquiry units
• Coaches were experienced science teachers
– Nearly 100 years of classroom experience at both middle and high school level
• Coaching sessions held once a week for about 45 minutes over 6 – 8 weeks
• Used WebEx
Coaching
E-Coaching Process
Research Study Results
• Based on student scientific inquiry abilities/practices specified in standards– Questioning
– Designing and conducting a scientific investigation
– Data collection, analysis and interpretation
– Developing explanations
– Communicating results
• Focus on teacher attitudes and behaviors needed to elicit student skills
Study Outcomes
Teacher Results
63 treatment teachers
61 control teachers
Teacher Inquiry Beliefs
3.5
3.55
3.6
3.65
3.7
3.75
3.8
3.85
3.9
3.95
4
Baseline EndYear
Rat
ing
(5 p
oin
t sc
ale
)
Treatment Control
Teacher Inquiry Knowledge
50
55
60
65
70
75
Baseline PtSumInst PostUnit
Pe
rce
nt
Treatment Control
Teacher Self-Efficacy
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Baseline PtSumInst PtUnit EndYear
Pe
rce
nt
Co
nfi
de
nce
Treatment Control
Teacher Instructional Practice
• Three observational instruments
– Teacher Inquiry Rubric (project-developed)
– EQUIP (Electronic Quality of Inquiry Protocol, Marshall, 2009)
–Partial Interval Classroom Inquiry Observation System (PICI; project-developed)
• 4-point rubric
• Six constructs based on student scientific inquiry abilities specified in standards (questioning, investigation, collect data, explanation, communication & application)
Teacher Inquiry Rubric
EQUIP Electronic Quality of Inquiry Protocol
19 indicators with overall construct scores targeting areas of reform or inquiry-based instruction that are linked to student achievement.
Instruction (How do I lead?)
Discourse (How do we interact?)
Assessment (How does instruction influence achievement?)
Curriculum (What guides teaching and learning?)
Partial Interval Classroom Inquiry (PICI) Observation System for Teachers (PICI-T)
• Interval recording procedure: 15 sec intervals• Records whether teacher is presenting or not
presenting inquiry instruction during each interval
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Baseline PtSumInst PtUnit
Rat
ing
TIR
Treatment Control
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Baseline PtSumInst PtUnit
Rat
ing
EQUIP
Treatment Control
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
Baseline PtSumInst PtUnit
Per
cen
t In
qu
iry
Inst
ruct
ion
PICI-T
Treatment Control
Teacher Performance
Student Results
~900 Treatment
~900 Control
Student Findings: MS Inquiry Knowledge
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
Baseline PTUnit
Perc
ent
Treatment Control
Student Self-efficacy
3.6
3.65
3.7
3.75
3.8
3.85
Baseline PtUnit End Year
Treatment Control
Student Inquiry Skills
• Instrument: Student Inquiry Rubric (SIR)
– Four-level rubric investigating student’s inquiry practices (questioning, collecting data, investigating, developing explanation from evidence, communicating results)
– Adapted from instrument developed by NE ESU 3
– Completed by teacher for each student in the study
Student Inquiry Rubric Results
3.01
3.07
2.75 2.76
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3
3.1
Rat
ing
(4-p
oin
t sc
ale
)
Treatment Control
High SchoolMiddle School
• Practice test showed promising results for the middle school inquiry knowledge scale (p = .10) but the overall score was not significant. NSD for high school.
• For actual NeSA, no significant differences in treatment and control for either middle or high school. Unfortunately, we could not get inquiry scale scores.
PICI-Student • Used 15 second interval recording procedure
• Student Response type: On-Task, Off-Task, Inquiry Engaged
PICI-S
67%
22%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Treatment Control
Student Inquiry Engagement
Coaching Evaluation
0 1 2 3 4 5
Overall coaching rating
CSI required too much time for thebenefit I gained
Coach helped me identify teachingstrategies to support student outcomes.
Coaching improved my teaching skills
Coaching changed my instructionalpractices to benefit student learning.
Coaching encouraged self-reflection
Contact InformationGwen Nugent
472-1009
National Center for Research on Rural Education
216 Mabel Lee Hall
Lincoln, NE 68583-0235
CSIRuralSchools.unl.edu
Suggested Citation:
Nugent, G., Kunz, G., Pedersen, J., Houston, J., Lee, S., Kalutskaya, I., & Wu, C. (2015, April). Impact of a Summer Institute and Instructional Coaching on Teacher and Student Science Inquiry Practice. Presentation at the Conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Chicago, IL.
The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant # R305C090022 to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. The opinions expressed are
those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.
