Running Head Examining Completers Teaching Effectiveness-Free PDF

  • Date:15 Sep 2020
  • Views:0
  • Downloads:0
  • Pages:21
  • Size:321.15 KB

Share Pdf : Running Head Examining Completers Teaching Effectiveness

Download and Preview : Running Head Examining Completers Teaching Effectiveness

Report CopyRight/DMCA Form For : Running Head Examining Completers Teaching Effectiveness


EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS 2,Introduction. The case study method was developed by Randolph College s EPP to demonstrate the following. program completers teaching skills including the following using multiple measures the. influence of program completers on P 12 student learning and development classroom. instruction and schools and the satisfaction of completers with the relevance and effectiveness. of their preparation CAEP Standard 4 Program Impact Four components to the standard were. addressed in the 2016 2017 case study These include the following completer impact on P 12. student learning and development indicators of teaching effectiveness satisfaction of employers. and satisfaction of completers The case study method was deemed the only way to provide data. to support completer s teaching effectiveness on P 12 student learning and development since. the Virginia Department of Education will not release student summative data Virginia SOL to. the Virginia EPP s,Aims of the case study, To gather substantial quantitative and qualitative documentation that provides supporting. evidence the Randolph College EPP completers have a positive impact on students. To improve the RC teacher preparation program as part of continuous improvement. Linda Darling Hammond 1999 reported effective teachers are the product of exemplary teacher. preparation programs She purports candidates must learn about learning and about the. structures and modes of inquiry of their disciplines so they can translate what they know into. effective curriculum teaching strategies and assessments Darling Hammond asserts. candidates who do not matriculate from exemplary preparation programs will not sustain. research based best teaching practices when they enter their own classrooms She maintains. these new teachers often revert to teaching practices they encountered during their high school. and college courses A long term goal of this project is to examine the influence of the RC. teacher preparation program over time Moreover a deeper investigation into the various aspects. of the program will assist the education department faculty in providing graduates with the skills. and knowledge they need to maintain research based teaching practices throughout their teaching. careers As we analyzed artifacts collected from program completers CAEP Standard 4 guided. us in examining the broader scope of preparing candidates who according to Darling Hammond. Hammerness Grossman Rust Shulman 2005 support their students toward productive. lives and careers p 441,Randolph College EPP 2018,EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS 3. Participants, Three outside case study researchers were hired to oversee the case study and to collect data The. case study researchers were selected from a group of Randolph College RC college supervisors. because they were familiar with the program and the observation protocol Participants included. six program completers based on the 10 benchmark set by CAEP who were selected by. drawing a stratified random sample from the completer years 2008 through 2015 Five. completers see Table 1 0 attended a focus group session February 26 2016 One completer was. unable to attend therefore a separate interview by the case study interviewer was scheduled. Table 1 Case study completers graduation year licensure area current teaching position. Completer pseudonym Graduation Licensure area s Current teaching. Year position, Helen 2008 special education general special education.
curriculum general curriculum, Caroline 2010 biology chemistry earth science high school chemistry. Wanda 2014 preK 6 elementary elementary 2nd grade, Ursula 2014 biology and earth science middle school earth. Sam 2015 special education general special education. curriculum general curriculum, Ruth 2015 special education general high school US. curriculum add on history history VA history,social studies. Focus group Participants were invited to attend a focus group discussion Participants. reviewed the IRB and signed the consent to participate agreement The focus group session was. videotaped and lasted one hour and 16 minutes All participants completed the RC EPP graduate. follow up evaluation form Three college supervisors facilitated the focus group interview. session Table 2 0 includes questions asked during the focus group Once the session was. completed the video tape was submitted to a faculty member in the RC EPP for transcription. Individual Interviews One college supervisor assigned to the completer who was not in. the focus group video session scheduled a meeting with the completer to ask the focus group. questions during a one to one meeting following the lesson observation All completers were. asked a set of five questions See Table 3 0 by their respective assigned college supervisor This. information was submitted to the Randolph EPP for analysis. Classroom observations and completer artifacts Each college supervisor was assigned. two completers One classroom observation was arranged independently with each participant. Randolph College EPP 2018,EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS 4.
program completer during a window of eight weeks following the focus group The Randolph. Classroom Observation form version 3 16 was completed by each college supervisor following. the observation The college supervisors collected decoded student data completers voluntarily. agreed to provide as evidence of teacher effectiveness Also principal observations were. submitted if the completer agreed to supply a copy of instrument The college supervisor. submitted completer artifacts to the Randolph EPP for analysis. Principal Interview Each college supervisor was assigned to schedule a meeting with. the completer s principal and use the Administrator Employer s follow up evaluation form One. principal s video was submitted along with completing the evaluation form The completed. forms were submitted to the Randolph EPP for analysis. Table 2 Focus group questions used for the February 26 2016 group interview. Question 1 Think about your education classes you have taken which have been the most. beneficial in your teaching career and why, Question 2 Of the education classes you have taken which have been the least beneficial at the. Question 3 Tell us about your success highlights so far during your teaching career. Question 4 Tell us frustrations you ve dealt with during your teaching. Question 5 So you think about your classes that you took during the program impacted your. ability to manage classroom experiences, Question 6 How do you measure student achievement summative and formative. Question 7 If there is anything we haven t covered and you d like to share about your. preparation here at Randolph s teacher education program. Table 3 Case study individual completer interview questions asked by the college supervisors. 1 What motivates you to teach and was it what you expected. 2 How influential were the professors at Randolph in your decision to teach. 3 What are you long term goals in education,4 What pleases you most about teaching. 5 How have you adjusted to teaching multi language children. Randolph College EPP 2018,EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS 5. Data analysis All data were analyzed to capture completers teaching effectiveness The. qualitative analysis case study method described by Creswell Poth 2018 was used as a guide. for determining approaches to reviewing completers artifacts The intent was to cast a wide net. gathering multiple measures and view artifacts in reference to InTASC standards Each. instrument had a target mean score or benchmark established by the EPP The findings were. organized by CAEP Standard 4 components to reveal the supporting evidence of RC EPP s. program completers impact on student learning, Focus Group The video recording was transcribed manually and organized by time.
stamp with the lines numbered A qualitative data analysis coding of transcripts recommended. by Wargo 2013 was used to develop coding themes attributes of teaching mentioned by the. participants during the focus group session Themes were tagged to the InTASC standards 1 10. and by InTASC standard clusters The learner and Learning Content Knowledge Instructional. Practice and Professional Responsibility For each question InTASC themes were tagged by. question Participant quotes were identified to support the themes for each question. Student achievement data Submitted student summative data provided were analyzed. by calculating the improvement if two or more reporting benchmark scores were shared. Benchmark test score report pass rates were averaged and compared to the VA SOL pass rate If. VA SOL end of year pass rate for the completer was self reported data were reported as. percent rate based on the submitted scores for a particular class If the completer reported annual. goals for improving student achievement the overall class average improvement data was. reported If the completer submitted multiyear VA SOL subject pass rates rates were compared. to the Virginia pass rate for each subject area If the completer submitted substitute end of year. test scores such as Advanced Placement subject pass rates these data were recorded as the. percent pass for the class One completer provided anecdotal information about a student s. progress through a life skills course making a connection for enrolling the student into a. technical school in the automotive industry Data submitted are described in Table 4. College supervisor lesson observations The college supervisor s classroom. observations using the Classroom Observation form for their assigned completers were. recorded by each item using a Likert scale distinguished 5 proficient 4 satisfactory 3. target level or above for all completers developing 2 and unsatisfactory 1 Given only six. participants data were not analyzed by licensure areas For each section of the evaluation. professional knowledge instructional planning instructional delivery assessment of and for. student learning professionalism and student academic progress means and standard deviations. were calculated Each subsection item was tagged with the corresponding InTASC standard A. target mean score of 3 0 was set, Employer surveys The administrators employer follow up evaluation forms were. returned to RC EPP by the college supervisors The data were recorded for the 20 item survey. using a five point Likert scale prompted by the question How well did Randolph College. prepare to The Likert scale was 5 4 high 3 2 average and 1 low Each item on the. instrument was tagged to InTASC standards Means and standard deviations were calculated for. Randolph College EPP 2018,EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS 6. each item A target mean score of 3 0 was established as acceptable competence in the. performance skill Question 21 was a free response question Comments were recorded. anonymously One principal s video interview was transcribed and coded for themes. Completer evaluations Five out of the 6 completers submitted a Randolph College. Graduate Follow up Evaluation Form after the focus group session The Likert scale on the form. was 5 4 high 3 2 average and 1 low Each item on the instrument was tagged to InTASC. standards Means and standard deviations were calculated for each item Target means of 3 0 was. set as the target The completer scores were compared to employer s responses to the same. Additional artifacts If completers provided information about leadership roles committee. work awards or additional comments about teaching these data were incorporated into CAEP. Standard sub categories as appropriate artifacts supporting teaching effectiveness If the. completer submitted copies of employer s evaluations student indicators of engagement and. observation document review forms used by the school the items were compared to the RC. case study employer survey and Classroom Observation form to see if there were similar. instrument items and if there were noted ratings below average or written comments regarding. teaching effectiveness, In order to elicit completers teaching effectiveness data gathered from the focus group student. achievement data college supervisor lesson observations employer and completer surveys and. additional artifacts were reviewed Analyzing the results in this way provided multiple measures. to support each of the CAEP 4 subheadings Results are reported for each sub category of the. CAEP Standard 4 Program Impact, 4 1 Completer impact on P 12 student learning and development. Data reviewed for this section included the focus group transcript Table 5 and student. assessment data submitted by completers Table 4 Sample student performance data submitted. by completers included benchmark data based on SOL summative tests task completion for life. skills end of year pass rates on AP tests substituted for VA SOL testing and nine week test data. for two cycles Completers assessment submissions were analyzed to see if there was evidence. of student improvement Table 4 shows each of the 5 completers have student achievement. improvement,Randolph College EPP 2018,EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS 7.
Table 4 Assessment data decoded submitted by case study completers. Completer Assessment s provided Analysis method Evidence of. improvement,Ruth 1 2 9 weeks calculated class yes,benchmark tests improvement 52. Running head EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS Case Study Examining Completers Teaching Effectiveness 2016 2017 Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation Component 4 1 Impact on P 12 Student Learning and Development Cheryl A Lindeman Peggy Schimmoeller and Consuella Woods Randolph College EXAMINING COMPLETERS TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS 2 Randolph College EPP

Related Books