Evaluating the Vermont Mathematics Initiative (VMI) in a Value Added Context H. ‘Bud’ Meyers, Ph.D. College of Education and Social Services University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Title I Directors Conference Sept 2007 Carol Diedrichsen Gwen Pollock Surveys of the Enacted Curriculum for English.
Advertisements

1 Mid-Term Review of The Illinois Commitment Assessment of Achievements, Challenges, and Stakeholder Opinions Illinois Board of Higher Education April.
Bridging Research, Information and Culture An Initiative of the Research and Planning Group for California Community Colleges Your Name Your Institution.
Center of Excellence in Leadership of Learning October 5, 2010.
Briefing: NYU Education Policy Breakfast on Teacher Quality November 4, 2011 Dennis M. Walcott Chancellor NYC Department of Education.
Pennsylvania’s Continuous Improvement Process. Understanding AYP How much do you know about AYP?
Collaborative Evaluation Communities in Urban Schools.
1 Minnesota MSP Grants June 2007 Leader Learning x Teacher Learning for Student Success Highlighting Professional Development Burnsville-Eagan-Savage School.
ESTEEMS (ESTablishing Excellence in Education of Mathematics and Science) Project Overview and Evaluation Dr. Deborah H. Cook, Director, NJ SSI MSP Regional.
Issues Surrounding the Evaluation of Teacher Internship Programs Donna Barrett Center for Education Integrating Science, Mathematics & Computing Georgia.
Steve Klass, Nadine Bezuk & Jane Gawronski
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP FOR DIVERSE LEARNERS Susan Brody Hasazi Katharine S. Furney National Institute of Leadership, Disability, and Students Placed.
Science Achievement and Student Diversity Okhee Lee School of Education University of Miami National Science Foundation (Grant No. REC )
A Mathematics Specialist Program: Its Structure and Impact on Practicing Elementary Teachers Nadine Bezuk & Susan Nickerson.
International Workshop on Graduate Programs for Secondary Mathematics and Science Teachers at Tokyo University of Science Tad Watanabe Kennesaw State University.
What is program success? Wendy Tackett, Ph.D., Evaluator Valerie L. Mills, Project Director Adele Sobania, STEM Oakland Schools MSP, Michigan.
Milwaukee Math Partnership Year 1 External Evaluation Lizanne DeStefano, Director Dean Grosshandler, Project Coordinator University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
1 Classroom-Based Research: How to Be a Researcher in Your Classroom Basic Skills Initiative Teaching and Learning Workshop October 2009 Darla M. Cooper.
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.
DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN Student Achievement Annual Progress Report Lakewood School District # 306.
Models for Evaluating MSP Projects Evaluation of Professional Development Programs MSP Regional Conference Dallas, Texas February 7, 2007 Norman L. Webb.
Cindy M. Walker & Kevin McLeod University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Grant No
Developing teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching Challenges in the implementation and sustainability of a new MSP Dr. Tara Stevens Department of.
High School Mathematics: Where Are We Headed? W. Gary Martin Auburn University.
1 / 27 California Educational Research Association 88 th Annual Conference Formative Assessment: Implications for Student Learning San Francisco, CA November.
Striving to Link Teacher and Student Outcomes: Results from an Analysis of Whole-school Interventions Kelly Feighan, Elena Kirtcheva, and Eric Kucharik.
Reaching for Excellence in Middle and High School Science Teaching Partnership Cooperative Partners Tennessee Department of Education College of Arts and.
Elementary & Middle School 2014 Mathematics MCAS Evaluation & Strategy.
The Impact of the Maine Learning Technology Initiative on Teachers, Students, and Learning Maine’s Middle School 1-to-1 Laptop Program Dr. David L. Silvernail.
THE DRAGON CONNECTION March Who are we?  Jefferson City Schools  Small, rural school district 60 miles north of Atlanta, 18 miles north of the.
The Impact of the MMP on Student Achievement Cindy M. Walker, PhD Jacqueline Gosz, MS University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee.
Research Indicators for Sustaining and Institutionalizing Change CaMSP Network Meeting April 4 & 5, 2011 Sacramento, CA Mikala L. Rahn, PhD Public Works,
Mathematics and Science Education U.S. Department of Education.
K-12 Mathematics in Rapid City Longitudinal Findings from Project PRIME Ben Sayler & Susie Roth November 5, 2009.
Ensuring that Professional Development Leads to Improved Mathematics Teaching & Learning Kristen Malzahn Horizon Research, Inc. TDG Leadership Seminar.
November 2006 Copyright © 2006 Mississippi Department of Education 1 Where are We? Where do we want to be?
CRESST’s Evaluation of the Artful Learning Program: “Findings,” Contexts, and Future Explorations Noelle Griffin,Ph.D UCLA Graduate School of Education.
Module 1: A Closer Look at the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics High School Session 3: Exploring Standard Progressions across High School Courses.
Linking a Comprehensive Professional Development Literacy Program to Student Achievement Edmonds School District WERA December 4, 2008.
Milwaukee Mathematics Partnership External Evaluation Schools and School Leadership Report by Tanya Suarez, Suarez & Associates June 9, 2005.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships: Summary of the Performance Period 2008 Annual Reports U.S. Department of Education.
New York State Staff/Curriculum Development Network S/CDN September 22, 2005.
Stay Strong Course Availability Analysis Phase I and II Illustrative Findings Jennifer Laird, Stacey Cataylo and Alexander Bentz Puget Sound Education.
1 What Are We Doing Here Anyway? Vision for our Work: Effective Science Learning Experiences Dave Weaver RMC Research Corp.
National Study of Education in Undergraduate Science: – What Was Learned Dennis Sunal, Cynthia Szymanski Sunal, Erika Steele, Donna Turner The.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships: Summary of the Performance Period 2008 Annual Reports U.S. Department of Education.
SD Math Partnership Project An Overview Marcia Torgrude and Karen Taylor.
CSU Center for Teacher Quality Assessing Teacher Preparation Outcomes for Program Improvement and Institutional Accountability CSU Academic Council Meeting.
The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat Le Secrétariat de la littératie et de la numératie October – octobre 2007 The School Effectiveness Framework A Collegial.
NECAP Presentation for School Year March 26,
Action Research Purpose and Benefits Technology as a Learning Tool to Improve Student Achievement.
Consortium for Educational Research and Evaluation– North Carolina Building LEA and Regional Professional Development Capacity First Annual Evaluation.
THE METLIFE SURVEY OF THE AMERICAN TEACHER: CHALLENGES FOR SCHOOL LEADERSHIP Gwendolyn Thomas Kimberly Patterson Shannon Biggs.
TEAM-Math Project Overview. TEAM-Math Mission Statement To enable all students to understand, utilize, communicate, and appreciate mathematics as a tool.
The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat Le Secrétariat de la littératie et de la numératie October – octobre 2007 The School Effectiveness Framework A Collegial.
Third-Party Evaluation Studies as a Basis for Determining Program Effectiveness and Improvement Needs Center for Research and Reform in Education Johns.
Asking the Right K-12 Questions How to Answer Them to Evaluate K-12 STEM Outreach and Engagement Carlos Rodriguez, Ph.D., Principal Research Scientist.
Granby Public Schools Annual Continuous Progress Review Presented by Diane Dugas Director of Curriculum September CMT Review.
Research Opportunities in AMSP UK Mathematics Education Retreat October 15, 2005.
EVALUATING A MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH M.ED. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Knowledge, Pedagogy, Practice or Student Achievement:
MSP Summary of First Year Annual Report FY 2004 Projects.
Preliminary Data Analyses
Evaluation of An Urban Natural Science Initiative
Designing Professional Development for Elementary School Teachers
2015 PARCC Results for R.I: Work to do, focus on teaching and learning
SUPPORTING THE Progress Report in MATH
Evidence-Based Practices Under ESSA for Title II, Part A
Report on SEC Data Analysis
Linking Evaluation to Coaching and Mentoring Models
Presentation transcript:

Evaluating the Vermont Mathematics Initiative (VMI) in a Value Added Context H. ‘Bud’ Meyers, Ph.D. College of Education and Social Services University of Vermont Douglas Harris, Ph.D. The Evaluation Center The Vermont Institutes, Montpelier, VT

Purpose Describe the context, purpose, structure, staffing and content of the instructional program for teachers Describe the logic model that provides the framework for evaluation of the program Examine the methodology for assessing the value added to student learning by teacher preparation in mathematics Present findings from cross-sectional analyses of eight cohorts of students who have been taught by VMI teachers and four cohorts of control students. Present findings from a qualitative evaluation of the process of implementation of the components of the program from the perspectives of participants and administrators Present recommendations arising from the findings of the evaluation

Context, purpose, structure, staffing A field based masters degree in Education with a primary emphasis on mathematics content Partially funded by local districts, partially MSP Focus on Grades k-8 Includes focus on teacher leadership Includes action research Three years Mathematicians and educators

Content-12 Courses Course 1: Mathematics as a Second Language (3 credits) Course 2: Functions and Algebra for Elementary Teachers (3 credits) Course 3: Trigonometry for Elementary Teachers (2 credits) and Algebra and Geometry II (1 credit) Course 4: Measurement, Geometry, and Probability for Elementary Teachers (3 credits) Course 5: Number Theory for Elementary Teachers (3 credits)

Courses…contd. Course 6: Statistics, Action Research, and Inquiry into Effective Practice, I (3 credits) Course 7: Statistics, Action Research, and Inquiry into Effective Practice, II (3 credits) Course 8: Algebra and Geometry for Elementary Teachers, III (3 credits) Course 9: Statistics, Action Research, and Inquiry into Effective Practice, III (3 credits) Course 10: Calculus for Elementary Teachers, I (3 credits)

Courses…contd. Course 11: Calculus for Elementary Teachers, II (3 credits) Course 12: Capstone VMI Experience (3 credits)

Methods Quantitative- Cross-sectional and longitudinal Two intervention groups Group 1=16 schools, multiple VMI teachers (HiEnd) Group 2=22 schools, single teacher per school (RegIntervention) Control group=22 schools, matched to Groups 1 and 2 (combined) on demographics Longitudinal comparisons for 2 cohorts, 1999 and 2000, grades 4 to 8. (See Figure 2)

Methods Qualitative Interviews Participants Graduates Administrators Observations Review of course materials and participant portfolios Course evaluations Interviews of School Staff and Leadership

Sample Characteristics Figure 1

Current and Potential Trend Studies with 3 data points for VT Data Others are cross-sectional, independent group comparisons YearGr 4Gr 5Gr 6Gr 7Gr 8Gr 9Gr x 2000x 2001x x 2004xx 2005x xx 2006 x x = Comparisons Longitudinal comparisons Figure 2

Question 1: What do comparisons with comparable schools show, over time, when students are matched from grade 4 through grade 8 and grade 10 during the two cohort groups ( , and )? Significant differences in t=3.22, p<.001, df 1, Significant differences in t = 5.27, p<.001, df 1, 1488 Significant differences in t = 3.39, p<.001, df 1, 1107 Figure 3 Figure 4

Discussion As indicated in Figures 3 and 4, each of the VMI cohorts outperforms the Control schools in similar patterns of difference. Results for comparisons at the first data point for each cohort (1999 and 2000) are not significantly different while they emerge as significant in 2005 and 2006.

Significant differences in adjusted for differences in 1999, HiEnd v Reg and Control, F = 7.96, df 2, 1235, p <.001 Question 2: How do levels of implementation of the VMI curriculum in classrooms relate to levels of achievement of students who experience them? (1999 Cohort) Figure 5

Significant differences in 2006 adjusted for differences in 2000, HiEnd v Reg and Control, F = 9.91, df 2, 1093, p <.001 Note: The average standard deviation for groups is about 40 points across all groups. Mean differences between groups is thus approximately.25 S.D. between HiEnd and Control groups. Question 2: How do levels of implementation of the VMI curriculum in classrooms relate to levels of achievement of students who experience them? (2000 Cohort) Figure 6

Discussion: VMI HiEnd Schools significantly out-performed the matched schools and appear to carry most of the difference between the VMI and matched schools in both cohorts from 1999 through Analyses of covariance adjusted the score differences at the first two data points in each cohort. The final data point for each cohort represents group differences at grade 10.

Question 3. Are school level effects related to income level of students and levels of content implementation of the VMI curriculum? (1999 Cohort) Do gaps close? Figure 7

Question 3. Are school level effects related to income level of students and levels of content implementation of the VMI curriculum? (2000 Cohort) Do gaps close? Figure 8

Discussion:

Quantitative Summary Longitudinal comparisons of VMI and Control schools indicate a persistent pattern of advantage for VMI schools Longitudinal comparisons indicate that the VMI schools, with more VMI teachers, had a significantly greater long term gain on percentile ranks. Stronger teachers may not have as great an effect in the shorter term when isolated. Longitudinal comparisons suggest that SES differences are reduced over time when high quality mathematics instruction is offered to all students

Qualitative Findings (2005 and 2006) Impact on Participants and Their Teaching Finding 1: Mathematics Content An overarching theme is the impact of the VMI experience on the teacher’s own understanding of mathematics content. This is consistent among participants in all three years of the VMI experience and remains the highest priority of graduates as they reflect on the VMI experience Finding 2: Increased Confidence Related to Mathematics Increased understanding of mathematics content impacts the confidence of participants as related to mathematics, to teaching mathematics, and to their enthusiasm for and enjoyment of mathematics. Finding 3: Impact on Instructional and Assessment Practice Participants graduates (many of who are math teacher leaders), and principals report that the instruction in VMI, increased content knowledge, and increased confidence have had major impact on instructional and assessment practice in the classrooms of participants and of teachers impacted by VMI-trained math teacher leaders Finding 4: The Impact of Action Research on Classroom Practice The impact of action research is mixed, with some participants, graduates, and principals reporting considerable impact, others less so. Finding 5: Principal Support The active support of principals makes a profound difference in VMI participants’ work in the classroom and in leadership positions.

More Qualitative Findings Finding 6: Personal Impact on Participants Beyond the impact of VMI on teachers in relation to math content, instruction, and leadership, the program also has profound personal impact on many participants. Impact on Students Finding 7: Transfer of VMI Content to the Classroom Teachers report direct transfer of mathematics content used in VMI to the math experiences of their students. Finding 8: Impact on Student Problem Solving Teachers and teacher leaders report that the problem solving emphasis in VMI has significant impact on their understanding of how to engage students in problem solving in the classroom. Finding 9: Impact of Action Research on Students Some teachers believe that the interventions begun in their action research projects will continue to impact their students over time. Impact on Teacher Leadership in Schools and Districts Finding 10: Impact on Teacher Leaders Teachers working as teacher leaders credit VMI for providing the knowledge, confidence, and support for them to take on leadership roles. This is true of teachers working in leadership at the school, district, and state levels. Finding 11: Impact on curriculum, instruction, and assessment Teacher leaders report that the knowledge base and contacts developed during VMI have significant impact on the development and implementation of mathematics curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Finding 12: Need for Ongoing Professional Community There is a common desire among VMI graduates to maintain the type of professional learning community afforded them through VMI.

Recommendations

Educational or Scientific Importance of the Study The National Research Council, (2004) US Department of Education (2004) and researchers at RAND (2004) have cited the need for better evaluations of teacher professional development programs. The combination of mixed method approaches with multiple strategies such as longitudinal studies of students acting as their own controls over time is the present attempt to respond to current concerns. In addition, intervention students in combination with matched groups at multiple intervals is a further attempt to provide additional confidence in results.

Want a copy of the paper or PowerPoint??