Evaluation of Teacher Preparation Programs: Purposes, Methods, and Policy Options Robert E. Floden, Michigan State University & Jeanne Burns, Louisiana.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Karl Donert, National Teaching Fellow HERODOT Project coordinator HERODOT: Benchmarking Geography.
Advertisements

IMPLEMENTING EABS MODERNIZATION Patrick J. Sweeney School Administration Consultant Educational Approval Board November 15, 2007.
MSCHE Annual Conference December st Century Higher Education Projections Increasingly diverse student populations Widely varying levels of secondary.
TWS Aid for Supervisors & Mentor Teachers Background on the TWS.
Slide 1 Educator Preparation Advisory Council (EPAC) Data Subcommittee February 25, 2014.
Migrant Education Comprehensive Needs Assessment
Accreditation Process Overview Presented By: The Saint John Vianney Accreditation Team Chris Gordon Pam Pyzyk Courtney Albright Dan Demeter Gloria Goss.
STRATEGIC PLAN Community Unit School District 300 7/29/
Title I Schoolwide Providing the Tools for Change Presented by Education Service Center Region XI February 2008.
1 Educator Preparation Advisory Council (EPAC) September, 2013.
April 6, 2011 DRAFT Educator Evaluation Project. Teacher Education and Licensure DRAFT The ultimate goal of all educator evaluation should be… TO IMPROVE.
1 S TATE C ONTEXT FOR I SSUES OF T EACHER P REPARATION A CCOUNTABILITY L OUISIANA J EANNE M. B URNS, P H.D. L OUISIANA B OARD OF R EGENTS A PRIL 7, 2015.
Program Evaluation Strategies to Improve Teaching for Learning Rossi Ray-Taylor and Nora Martin Ray.Taylor and Associates MDE/NCA Spring School Improvement.
1 CASAS Overview Symposium on Issues and Challenges in Assessment and Accountability for Adult English Language Learners May 16, 2003 Washington DC Linda.
Education Commission of the States Working Together to Address a Common Need: Partnerships for Teacher Quality Bruce Vandal Director, Postsecondary Education.
1 Michigan Department of Education Office of School Improvement One Common Voice – One Plan Michigan Continuous School Improvement (MI-CSI)
MOOCs and the Quality Code Ian G. Giles PFHEA Medical Education
National Science Foundation: Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (TUES)
Evaluation. Practical Evaluation Michael Quinn Patton.
Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European
NTEP – Network for Transforming Teacher Preparation A presentation to the State Board TAC on Tiered Licensure and Career Ladders April 6, 2014.
How to Develop the Right Research Questions for Program Evaluation
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Transforming Clinical Practice and P-20 Partnerships.
Learner-Ready Teachers  More specifically, learner-ready teachers have deep knowledge of their content and how to teach it;  they understand the differing.
A Comprehensive Unit Assessment Plan Program Improvement, Accountability, and Research Johns Hopkins University School of Education Faculty Meeting October.
Applying the Principles of Prior Learning Assessment Debra A. Dagavarian Diane Holtzman Dennis Fotia.
FAEIS Project User Opinion Survey 2005 Thursday, June 23, 2005 Washington, D.C. H. Dean SutphinYasamin Miller ProfessorDirector, SRI Agriculture & Extension.
Year Seven Self-Evaluation Workshop OR Getting from Here to There Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities.
Monitoring and Evaluation in MCH Programs and Projects MCH in Developing Countries Feb 10, 2011.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | Transitioning from NCATE and TEAC to CAEP: How? Patty Garvin, Senior Director,
Using Electronic Portfolios to Assess Learning at IUPUI. Trudy Banta, et. al. Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis 2007.
Teacher Education Accountability: Impact on States and Teacher Preparation Programs Sophia McArdle, Ph.D. Office of Postsecondary Education.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | The Next Horizon Incorporating Student Perception Surveys into the Continuous.
HECSE Quality Indicators for Leadership Preparation.
March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
Commission on Teacher Credentialing Ensuring Educator Excellence 1 Biennial Report October 2008.
National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment Developmental Reviews at King Saud University and King Faisal University.
Early Childhood Outcomes Center1 Using Data for Program Improvement Christina Kasprzak, NECTAC/ECO Ann Bailey, NCRRC July 2010.
A Principled Approach to Accountability Assessments for Students with Disabilities CCSSO National Conference on Student Assessment Detroit, Michigan June.
FEBRUARY KNOWLEDGE BUILDING  Time for Learning – design schedules and practices that ensure engagement in meaningful learning  Focused Instruction.
1. Housekeeping Items June 8 th and 9 th put on calendar for 2 nd round of Iowa Core ***Shenandoah participants*** Module 6 training on March 24 th will.
Professionalizing Mobility Management: Developing Standards and Competencies Julie Dupree, Easter Seals Association of Travel Instruction Conference August.
From Inputs to Process to Outcomes: the Quality Management Program at the American University in Bulgaria Steven F. Sullivan Dean of Faculty.
WHO Global Standards. 5 Key Areas for Global Standards Program graduates Program graduates Program development and revision Program development and revision.
Federal Update: Part II NASDTEC Allison Henderson, Westat June 7, 2015.
Crown Point Schools Systems Accreditation November 24, 2014.
Policy for Results: How Policy Meets Preparation to Lead the Way to Improved Outcomes: H325A
A Basic Guide to Academic Assessment Presented by Darby Kaikkonen Director of Institutional Research.
Idaho Energy Plan Proposal (RFI) Energy Policy Institute (EPI)
Monitoring and Evaluation in MCH Programs and Projects MCH in Developing Countries Feb 24, 2009.
Intro to Outcomes. What is “Outcomes”? A. a statewide initiative aimed at improving learning and accountability in education B. a standing SFCC committee.
SUNY TAACCCT Grant PLA Advisory Board Agenda Review of Charge WordPress Site Policy – Philosophical differences on PLA – What makes a good: Policy?
National Quality Assurance and Accreditation Committee & Quality Assurance and Accreditation Project Action Planning Workshop January 2007.
The Gold Standard… Faculty are Key.  Annual Assessment based on  Address each SLO  Be specific, measurable, student- focused  Align the new.
1 The project is financed from the European Union funds within the framework of Erasmus+, Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of.
Monitoring and Evaluation in MCH Programs and Projects MCH in Developing Countries Feb 9, 2012.
Presented at the OSPA Summit 2012 January 9, 2012.
Intervention and Support Inclusion Questions. Early and Strategic  How does the school provide purposeful early intervention and support to lift the.
CCSSO Task Force Recommendations on Educator Preparation Idaho State Department of Education December 14, 2013 Webinar.
ESG 2015: Linking external and internal QA Involving stakeholders Tia Loukkola Director for Institutional Development 22 January 2016.
School for Academic Administrators: Learning Objectives Rodney A. Webb, Associate Vice-President, Academic January 24, 2005.
Stetson University welcomes: NCATE Board of Examiners.
CONNECT WITH CAEP | | Standard 2: Partnership for Practice Stevie Chepko, Sr. VP for Accreditation.
Presentation on Outcomes Assessment Presentation on Outcomes Assessment toCCED Mohawk Valley Community College October 11, 2004.
HLC Criterion Four Primer Thursday, Oct. 15, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
Implementing QM towards Program Certification
Program Quality Assurance Process Validation
Standard 3 Candidate Quality, Recruitment, and Selectivity
Purpose of Outcomes measurement
Presentation transcript:

Evaluation of Teacher Preparation Programs: Purposes, Methods, and Policy Options Robert E. Floden, Michigan State University & Jeanne Burns, Louisiana Board of Regents CCSSO Webinar December 10, 2013

National Academy of Education report Feuer, M. J., Floden, R. E., Chudowsky, N., & Ahn, J. (2013). Evaluation of Teacher Preparation Programs: Purposes, Methods, and Policy Options. Washington, DC: National Academy of Education. Supported by NSF Award No Full report:

Purpose of Report Foster thoughtful discussion of approaches to evaluation of teacher preparation programs (TPP) Describe dimensions of variability in current systems of TPP evaluation: – Purposes – Systems – Sources of evidence Describe examples from other fields and nations Offer guidance for TPP evaluation system design and revision

Focus on Preparation Programs Evaluation of Programs, not Individual Teachers Most programs are part of higher education system Approximately 1,400 higher education institutions prepare teachers in the US Some teacher preparation done by other organizations, such as Teach For America

Purposes for Evaluating Teacher Preparation Programs Hold programs accountable Provide consumer information to – prospective TPP students – their potential future employers Support program self-improvement

Systems for TPP Evaluation Federal (Title II) reporting requirements National non-governmental (e.g., CAEP) State program approval Media and independent organizations (e.g., US News & NCTQ) Teacher preparation programs – individually and in networks

Principles Guiding our Analysis Importance of validity (i.e., defensible conclusions and desired consequences) Program evaluation is not sufficient for improvement Multiple players with varying purposes and interests Weigh limits and benefits of system Consider differential effects on diverse populations Systems should be adaptable Systems should be transparent and held accountable

Examples of Types of Evidence “Input” measures – Selectivity – Faculty qualifications – Quality and substance of instruction – Student teaching experience “Output” measures – Teacher tests and performance assessments – Hiring and retention – Surveys of employers – Impact on student learning

Typical Input Measure Strengths and Weaknesses Strengths – Some evidence relatively easy to gather – Face validity – e.g., faculty should be experts, teachers should study learning theories Weaknesses – Little empirical evidence of connection to teacher quality – Difficult to gather evidence on quality of instruction – May produce superficial compliance

Typical Output Measure Strengths and Weaknesses Strengths – Focuses directly on desired outcomes – Familiar to key constituencies – funders, citizens, employers Weaknesses – Many important outcomes difficult to measure – May ignore variation in institutional mission – Challenging to account for differences in incoming students

Strengths and Weaknesses: An output example Average Value Added of TPP graduates: – Strengths Connection to outcome valued by policy makers and employers May be used in system by which graduates are evaluated – Weaknesses Confounded with school placements Little information about change in TTP students due to program Grain size too coarse for program improvement

Questions to Ask When Designing or Revising TPP Evaluation Systems 1: What is the primary purpose of the TPP evaluation system? 2: Which aspects of teacher preparation matter most? 3: What sources of evidence will provide the most accurate and useful information about those aspects? 4: How will the measures be analyzed and combined? 5: What are the intended and potentially unintended consequences of the evaluation system? 6: How will transparency be achieved? 7: How will the evaluation system be monitored?

Teacher Preparation Transformation Guide ElementsDescriptions Teacher Preparation Concerns/Needs: Primary Purpose of Teacher Preparation Transformation: Primary Stakeholders to be Engaged in the Teacher Preparation Transformation: Aspects of Teacher Preparation Programs that Matter the Most: Characteristics of “Learner Ready” New Teachers: Initiatives that Support the Teacher Preparation Transformation:. Types of Evidence for Outcomes: Web Site Links: Reports to Guide Teacher Preparation Transformation Discussions: Tool to Guide NTEP & NAE Report Discussions

Screens/Assessments/Evidence for Teacher Preparation Programs Teacher Preparation Stages Types of Screens/Assessments/Evidence Current University Requirements Current State Law/Policy/Procedures Recommendations of Other Stakeholders Admission to Universities Entry Into Teacher Preparation Programs (e.g., Professional Coursework) Teacher Preparation Progress & Entry into Student Teaching Completion of Teacher Preparation Program Teacher Licensure Post-Graduate Assessment of Teacher Preparation Completers Evaluation of Teacher Preparation Programs by State and National Agencies Tool to Guide NTEP & NAE Report Discussions

site/documents/webpage/naed_ pdf