Upload
lupita
View
29
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Mathematics RtI : One Program's Efforts to Enhance Teacher Candidates' Knowledge and Skills. David Allsopp , David Hoppey, Stacy Hahn, Aimee Frier , Scot Rademaker University of South Florida. Presentation Outline. Program Structure & Sequence Summer Institute Description - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Mathematics RtI: One Program's Efforts to Enhance Teacher Candidates' Knowledge and
Skills
David Allsopp, David Hoppey,
Stacy Hahn, Aimee Frier,
Scot RademakerUniversity of South Florida
Presentation Outline
• Program Structure & Sequence• Summer Institute Description• Individual Math Intervention Project (IMIP)
Description• Research Questions• Research Design• Findings• Implications
Structure of the Program
Competency based program of study that:• Focuses on developing teachers as problem solver • Integrates content across a logical developmental
sequence• Scaffolds expectations for learning from an acquisition to
generalization framework• Emphasizes collaborative teaching structures and situates
the program to engage in interdisciplinary partnerships• Provides graduates with supported opportunities to gain
the necessary knowledge, skills, and dispositions to meet the needs of students with disabilities
TE
Program Sequence
Semester 1
•7 hour instructional block
•Linked field experiences
•Partner schools
Semester 2
•6 hour instructional block
•Linked field experience
•Partner schools
•Content emphasis
Semester 3
•3 hour instructional block
•Linked field experience (Summer Institute)
•Partner district
•Content emphasis
Semester 4
•5 hour instructional block
•Linked field experience (year long placement)
•Partner schools
•Content emphasis
Semester 5
•3 hour instructional block
•Final internship
•Content emphasis
•Professional seminar
•PPPs•Reading Endorsement
•ESOL Endorsement
Team Teaching Approach
Continuous Progress Monitoring: Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Purposes of the Summer Institute
1) Work with a partnership school to provide students with learning/cognitive based disabilities extended school learning experiences in reading and mathematics
2) Provide special education pre-service teacher candidates opportunities to implement and receive feedback on the use of research supported reading and mathematics instructional practices for students with disabilities.
3) Provide special education pre-service teacher candidates with opportunities to plan, implement and manage classroom instruction responsibilities and experience the realities of this with high levels of support.
4) Provide special education pre-service teacher candidates with opportunities to teach collaboratively and reflect on and learn from both the benefits and challenges of effective collaboration.
5) Provide special education pre-service teacher candidates opportunities to experience interacting with school personnel and students’ families in professional ways.
Summer Institute Logistics
• Third semester of program• 2 week seminar (occurs before beginning of practicum)– 3 days per week/4 hours per day
• 5 week practicum – 3 days per week/4 hours per day
• Partnership with a Charter School for Students with Disabilities (K-12/Transition)
• Assigned to classrooms of 4-8 students with a co-teach partner
• Supervised by program faculty/doctoral students
Individual Math Intervention Project (IMIP)
This assignment has 3 parts. • Part 1: Student Selection/description of needs, strengths, and interests• Part 2: Intervention Development (See handouts)
– A. Pre-Assessment– B. Hypothesis/Intervention Design– C. Progress Monitoring Plan
• Part 3: Intervention Implementation, Evaluation, and Final Analysis– A. Session Notes/Ongoing data based decision making– B. Instructional Timeline including strategies and progress monitoring
tools used– C. Post-Assessment– D. Student Performance Reflective Summary and Future
Recommendations– E. Weekly and Final Reflections on what the pre-service teacher
learned
Structure for TC Daily Intervention Sessions
Instructional Phases - (see handout)
1. Measure Progress & Make Instructional Decisions
2. Problem Solve the New
3. Build Proficiency
Mathematics Literacy Initiative
Overall Research Questions
1. What is the nature of pre-service special education teacher candidates’ implementation of individualized mathematics interventions that utilize research supported practices (IMIP)?
2. How does the analysis of students’ IMIP projects inform faculty about teacher candidates’ thinking related to data based instructional decision-making in mathematics?
Research Design• Qualitative analysis of teacher candidate performance artifacts
(Individualized Mathematics Instruction Project – IMIP).• Sampling – random sample of 13 teacher candidates’ IMIP from
the same cohort (N=36)– Pilot – 5 teacher candidates’ IMIP representing a range of overall
performance (lowest-highest)• Instrumentation – IMIP Evaluation Form (see example)• Analysis – Open coding process
– Individual researchers evaluated one of 5 IMIP– Researchers met to compare evaluations of first two areas of IMIP
Evaluation Form– One researcher reviewed all completed evaluation forms and
generated initial codes– All five researchers met to review codes, discuss, and reach
consensus including themes/families/examples
Sample: IMIP Analysis Form
Preliminary Findings
Areas of Analysis
– Student Needs– Assessment– Intervention Design– Planning– Instructional Practices– NCTM Processes
Research Question #1:
What is the nature of preservice special education teacher candidates’ implementation of individualized mathematics interventions that utilize research supported effective practices?
Assessment
Use of a Continuous Cycle of Assessment
Use of particular assessment techniques over others
Connection/comparison of data across assessment cycle (pre, ongoing, post)
Instructional decisions apparent at particular points and not others
Focus on certain components (pre, ongoing, post) rather than all
Number Knowledge Test; Student Interests; CRA Assessment OVER error pattern analysis and flexible
interview
Limited
Parallel to which assessment component TC completed
Themes
Intervention Design
Difficulty with isolating scope and sequence of target concept/Skill
Difficulty articulating the function (“because”) of the mathematics difficulty the student is demonstrating
Connection between initial intervention design and subsequent intervention sessions
Consistent completion of data/planning forms
Level of clarity/specificity of intervention across sessions
Lack of complete understanding of the targeted math concept & relationships to
other concepts (Number Sense, Operations, Algebraic Thinking)
Lack of complete understanding of the targeted math concept & relationships to
other concepts (Number Sense, Operations, Algebraic Thinking)
Limited in some cases; Evident in others
Limited in some cases; Evident in other cases
Level of clarity/specificity increases across sessions for most cases
Themes
Planning
Instructional decision-making/real-time planning within lessons
Connection between pre-intervention planning (daily planning guides) and data/information recorded on daily session notes
Clarity/specificity in describing thinking from session to session
Limited in a few; Evident in most
Limited but somewhat improved across sessions
Improves across sessions for all but one case
Themes
Instructional PracticesRS Instructional Practice
Evident? Demonstrates Reflective Practice?
C-R-A Sequence Yes - 2No - 3
Yes - 1No - 4
Advance Organizers Yes - 3No - 2
Yes - 0No - 5
Explicit Modeling Yes - 4No - 1
Yes - 3No - 2
Language Experiences Yes - 0No - 5
Yes - 0No - 5
Scaffolding/Guided Practice
Yes - 2No - 3
Yes - 1No - 4
Multiple Opportunities to Respond
Yes - 3No - 2
Yes - 2No - 3
Research Supported Instructional Practices: Themes
• Evidence of use more apparent than reflection about use of RSP– Example: Weekly Reflections
• Lack direct connections between use of a specific practice to student learning
• General descriptions/examples of RSP– Example: Explicit Modeling
• Lack references to/examples of specific EM technqiues such as “think alouds,” examples/non-examples, cueing, visuals, etc.
• Little variation in how RSP were applied across sessions– Example: Advance Organizers/Graphic Organizers
• Same LIP procedures and GO used across sessions
Preliminary Findings
Assessment
Intervention Design
Daily Lessons
Instructional Decisions
Research Question #2:
How does the analysis students’ IMIP projects inform faculty about teacher candidates’ data based instructional decision-making in mathematics?
Logical Progression of DBDM
Intervention Design• Hypothesis• Pre-assessment data • Instructional Practices• Progress Monitoring
Plan
Daily Lessons• Planning Guide• Session Notes• Summary Notes
Instructional Decisions• Uses DBDM to plan
for the next days lesson
Assessment
DBDM Discussion Points• How well students designed the project did not necessarily
correspond to the way the project was implemented and monitored.– Some students’ intervention design was appropriate but they had
difficulty effectively adapting instruction using ongoing data.– On the other hand, other students did not effectively design an
appropriate intervention but used ongoing data effectively to meet students needs.
– 1 of the 5 students was able to do both. • In this analysis a lack of understanding of the math concepts
that the pre-service teachers were teaching was apparent which subsequently influenced the effectiveness of DBDM.
How Can this Research Inform Teacher Education Programs?
• Need to embed Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) throughout the program
• Developmental nature of learning to teaching – especially for learning to teach students with disabilities or students
who struggle with mathematics• Need engaged scholars who find opportunities to provide
targeted field experiences, ongoing instruction, and continuous feedback for pre-service teachers on providing effective mathematics interventions
• Need for faculty across SPED and mathematics education to become knowledgeable about the needs of mathematical and disability related learning needs for students with exceptionalities
Next Steps
• Revise instrumentation & analysis procedures as appropriate based on pilot
• Complete analysis of remaining eight IMIP from sample; determine if saturation is apparent
• Finalize interpretations• Target areas in program for enhancement/change
(e.g., incorporate fidelity checks)• Dissemination
Contact Information
• David Allsopp - [email protected] • David Hoppey – [email protected] • Stacy Hahn – [email protected] • Aimee Frier - [email protected] • Scot Rademaker - [email protected]