Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
quality
quality
George Noell, Ph.D.Louisiana State University and A&M College/
Louisiana Department of EducationAnd
Jeanne M. Burns, Ph.D.Louisiana Board of Regents & Office of the Governor
2007-08 ResultsValue-Added Teacher Preparation
Assessment Model
Board of Regents & Board of Elementary and Secondary Education Joint Meeting
December 3, 2008
quality
Four Levels of Effectiveness forTeacher Preparation Programs in Louisiana
Level 1: Effectiveness of Planning
(Redesign of Teacher Preparation Programs)
Level 2: Effectiveness of Implementation
(NCATE – Comprehensive Assessment System)
Level 3: Effectiveness of Impact
(Teacher Preparation Accountability System)
Level 4: Effectiveness of Growth in
Student Learning
(Value Added Teacher Preparation
Program Assessment)
quality
Louisiana State University Quantitative Research Team
• Lead Researcher: Dr. George Noell – Department of Psychology – Louisiana State University and A&M College
• LSU Research Team Members: Veronica Gulley, Bethany Porter, Anna Beth Ball, Maria Patt, Amanda Dahir
Grant funded byCarnegie Corporation of New York &
Louisiana Board of Regents
quality
Key People in Louisiana Who Have Made This Research Possible
• Current Commissioner of Higher Education Sally Clausen, Current State Superintendent Paul Pastorek, Past Commissioner of Higher Education E. Joseph Savoie, and Past State Superintendent Cecil Picard
• Louisiana Department of Education Division of Planning, Analysis, and Information Resources (David Elder – Division Director, Allen Schulenberg, Robert Kaufman, Kelvin LaCroix, Steve Gunning, Sam Pernici, and Roth Aymond)
quality
Value-Added Teacher PreparationAssessment Model
Process
• Predict student achievement based on
prior achievement, demographics, and
attendance.• Assess actual student achievement.• Calculate degree to which students
taught by new teachers met achievement of similar students taught by experienced teachers.
• Act on results.
quality
2007-08 StudyBreakdown of Data
• Years 2004-2005, 2005-2006, and 2006-07
• Student Grade Levels: Grades 4-9
• Content Areas: Mathematics; Science; Social Studies; Language Arts; and Reading
• Tests: Iowa Test of Basic Skills, i-LEAP, and LEAP-21
• Pathways for New Teachers: Undergraduate and Alternate Certification Programs (Master of Arts in Teaching, Practitioner Teacher Program, and Non-Master’s/Certification-Only)
quality
New and Experienced Teachers
• New Teachers: – 1st and 2nd year teachers with regular
certificates– Completed Teacher Preparation Program
within 5 years– Teaching within area of certification
• Experienced Teachers– 3rd or subsequent year teachers with regular certificates – Teaching within area of certification
quality
Post-Redesign Programs & Pre-Redesign Programs
• Post-Redesign Programs: Programs that were redesigned for grades PK-3, 1-5, 4-8, and 6-12 and began admitting pre-service teachers on July 1, 2003.
• Pre-Redesign Programs: Universities stopped admitting candidates to the programs on July 1, 2003. A phase out period is occurring for pre-redesign programs.
quality
Criteria for Inclusion of New Teachers in Study
• Inclusion for each content area– 25 or more new teachers in grades 4-9 – At least 10 new teachers per year– Teaching within certification– Remained with student full academic year
• Not all universities had sufficient new teachers to be included in the analysis. Another year of data will be added and will increase the number that exceed 25 graduates.
quality
Value-Added Model Predictors:Hierarchical Linear Models
quality
Teacher Preparation Effect Estimates
• Based on at least 25 new teachers per program across multiple school districts in Louisiana.
• Reflects a pattern of effectiveness of new teachers when compared to the average effectiveness of not new certified professionals.
quality
quality Key Findings
Post-Redesign
quality
Effect Estimates for Post-RedesignAlternate Certification Program
Social StudiesPerformance Bands Effect Estimates
Level 1: Programs more effective than experienced teachers.
University of Louisiana at Monroe (+2.8)
Level 2: Programs comparable in effectiveness to experienced teachers.
Louisiana College (+2.6)Northwestern State University (+0.8)
Level 3: Programs comparable in effectiveness to new teachers.
The New Teacher Project (-0.1)University of Louisiana at Lafayette (-1.1)Louisiana Resource Center (-3.2)
(Note: Mean for new teachers = -2.1)
Level 4: Programs less effective than new teachers.
Level 5: Programs significantly less effective.
quality
Effect Estimates for Post-RedesignAlternate Certification Program
SciencePerformance Bands Effect Estimates
Level 1: Programs more effective than experienced teachers.
Northwestern State University (+2.7)University of Louisiana at Monroe (+1.7)
Level 2: Programs comparable in effectiveness to experienced teachers.
The New Teacher Project (+0.7)
Level 3: Programs comparable in effectiveness to new teachers.
Louisiana College (+0.4)University of Louisiana at Lafayette (-0.9)Louisiana Resource Center (-1.3)
(Note: Mean for new teachers = -1.1)
Level 4: Programs less effective than new teachers.
Level 5: Programs significantly less effective.
quality
Effect Estimates for Post-RedesignAlternate Certification Program
MathematicsPerformance Bands Effect Estimates
Level 1: Programs more effective than experienced teachers.
The New Teacher Project (+3.1)
Level 2: Programs comparable in effectiveness to experienced teachers.
University of Louisiana at Monroe (+1.1)Northwestern State University (+0.8)
Level 3: Programs comparable in effectiveness to new teachers.
Louisiana College (-2.7)University of Louisiana at Lafayette (-2.9)Louisiana Resource Center (-3.2)
(Note: Mean for new teachers = -2.7)
Level 4: Programs less effective than new teachers.
Level 5: Programs significantly less effective.
quality
Effect Estimates for Post-RedesignAlternate Certification Program
Language Arts
Performance Bands Effect Estimates
Level 1: Programs more effective than experienced teachers.
University of Louisiana at Monroe (+2.7)The New Teacher Project (+1.6)
Level 2: Programs comparable in effectiveness to experienced teachers.
Louisiana College (+1.5)Northwestern State University (+0.5)Nicholls State University (-0.3)
Level 3: Programs comparable in effectiveness to new teachers.
Louisiana Resource Center (-1.8)
(Note: Mean for new teachers = -1.8)
Level 4: Programs less effective than new teachers.
University of Louisiana at Lafayette (-4.6)
Level 5: Programs significantly less effective.
quality
Effect Estimates for Post-RedesignAlternate Certification Program
Reading
Performance Bands Effect Estimates
Level 1: Programs more effective than experienced teachers.
The New Teacher Project (+2.2)Louisiana College (+2.1)
Level 2: Programs comparable in effectiveness to experienced teachers.
Northwestern State University (+0.6)
Level 3: Programs comparable in effectiveness to new teachers.
University of Louisiana at Lafayette (-2.4)
(Note: Mean for new teachers = -1.8)
Level 4: Programs less effective than new teachers.
Level 5: Programs significantly less effective.
Louisiana Resource Center (-6.2)
quality
ACT Scores of New Teachers
• ACT scores of new teachers within programs did not account for variance in teacher preparation program effectiveness.
• ACT mathematical scores of individual new teachers across programs was a modest predictor of teacher effectiveness in mathematics.
quality
Impact of Teachers Who Are Not Content Certified
Content Coefficient (CI)
Mathematics -3.50(-4.70, -2.28)
Reading -1.27(-1.72, -0.82)
Language Arts -4.09(-4.70, -2.28)
Science -1.58(-2.34, -0.82)
Social Studies -3.32(-4.61, -2.03)
Teachers who are certified in the content area they are teaching are more effective than those who are not
certified to teach that content.
quality
Principal Implications of Quantitative Research Study
• Teacher preparation programs can prepare new teachers whose students demonstrate achievement that is comparable to the achievement of students taught by experienced certified professionals.
• Varying levels of effectiveness exist within teacher preparation programs and across teacher preparation programs.
• ACT scores of new teachers do not account for variance in teacher preparation program effectiveness.
• ACT mathematics scores of individual teachers is a modest predictor of teacher effectiveness in mathematics.
• Certified teachers are more effective than teachers who are not certified to teach the content.
Teacher Preparation Matters
quality
State Qualitative ResearchTeam
• Lead Researcher: Dr. Jeanne Burns – Board of Regents/Office of the Governor
• State Research Team Members:- One researcher from each public and private university in Louisiana- One researcher from each private provider in the state - Representatives from the Louisiana Department of Education and University of Louisiana University System
Why do students taught by new teachers from some teacher preparation programs demonstrate greater growth in learning than students taught by
new teachers from other teacher preparation programs?
quality
Data Collected by State Research Team (July 1, 2007 – June 30, 2008)
Grant funded byCarnegie Corporation of New York &
Louisiana Board of Regents
• Teacher Preparation Curriculum Audit• Teacher Preparation Program Structure
- General Information
- Baccalaureate Program
- Alternate Program• Faculty Attribute Audit• Program Completer Audit
quality
Data To Be Collected by State Research Team (July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009)
• Student Teachers- Observation Scale- Survey of Teacher Preparation Program
• New Teachers (2nd Year)- Observation Scale- Survey of Teacher Preparation Program
• Supervisors of Student Teachers- Survey of Teacher Preparation Program
• Mentor of New Teachers (2nd Year Teachers)- Survey of Teacher Preparation Program
• Teacher Researchers (1st and 2nd Year Teachers)- Disposition Scale- In-depth Observation- In-depth Interview- Working Conditions Survey
quality
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
George [email protected]
Jeanne M. [email protected]
http://www.regents.state.la.us/Academic/TE/Value%20Added.htm
