WORKING TOGETHER TO IMPROVE SCIENCE EDUCATION PRESENTED BY GIBSON & ASSOCIATES A CALIFORNIA MATH AND SCIENCE PARTNERSHIP RESEARCH GRANT WISE II Evaluation.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Providing On-going Support for STEM Teachers Joan D. Pasley Horizon Research, Inc.
Advertisements

Math Content Network Update The Power of Mistakes Student Engagement Culture of Learning Growth Mindset Congruent Tasks.
CA Math & Science Partnership Grant (CaMSP) Partnership for Student Achievement.
Action Research Opportunity Or Research Based Action.
ESTEEMS (ESTablishing Excellence in Education of Mathematics and Science) Project Overview and Evaluation Dr. Deborah H. Cook, Director, NJ SSI MSP Regional.
Riverpoint Partnership for Math and Science.  Who are we? A group of high school, college and university faculty from 7 school districts, 2 community.
Getting the Most Out of CaMSP: Into, Through and Beyond Elk Grove Unified School District February 27, 2012 Anne Zeman, Ed.D, Director of Curriculum and.
A few of the Achievement Outcomes for San Francisco Unified School District’s California Math and Science Partnership Grant- Working together to Improve.
Project RACE: Rigorous Academic Curriculum for Everyone.
IV Ca MSP: The Next Frontier in Professional Development Thursday, February 14, 2008 San Francisco, CA.
Mathematics and Science Partnership Grant Title IIB Information Session April 10, 2006.
An Introduction. Sponsored by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. HER A five-year National Science Foundation grant for the advancement.
Steve Klass, Nadine Bezuk & Jane Gawronski
A Mathematics Specialist Program: Its Structure and Impact on Practicing Elementary Teachers Nadine Bezuk & Susan Nickerson.
2014 CCSS Tools Conference Beginning with the End in Mind: Performance Assessment as a Catalyst for Common Core Implementation.
Jefferson County Public Schools University of Louisville.
MATHEMATICS Support for Single Plan for Student Achievement.
Local Evaluation Overview and Preliminary Findings Diane Schilder, EdD.
Digital Badges: Development Workshop Angela Elkordy Doctoral Candidate Eastern Michigan University, Leadership and Counseling Dept.
1 Developing an Evaluation Plan _____________________ The Mathematically- Connected Communities MSP Developed for the February, MSP Conference Dr.
Project P.O.S.T. Preparing Outstanding Science Teachers A Partnership of GCS & UNCG A Partnership of GCS & UNCG.
Southern Regional Education Board HSTW An Integrated and Embedded Approach to Professional Development and School Improvement Using the Six-Step Process.
Cindy M. Walker & Kevin McLeod University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee Based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Grant No
“We will lead the nation in improving student achievement.” CLASS Keys TM Module 1: Content and Structure Spring 2010 Teacher and Leader Quality Education.
Improving Teaching and Learning: One District’s Journey Curriculum and Instruction Leadership Symposium February 18-20, 2009  Pacific Grove, CA Chula.
Math Science Partnership Excellence In Mathematics Lanakila Elementary School Honolulu, HI.
1 / 27 California Educational Research Association 88 th Annual Conference Formative Assessment: Implications for Student Learning San Francisco, CA November.
Leading Change Through Differentiated PD Approaches and Structures University-District partnerships for Strengthening Instructional Leadership In Mathematics.
PILOT REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH DISTRICT: Select a minimum of 10% of schools to participate. A minimum of 1 school MUST meet the minimum participant requirements.
Boston Public Schools Elementary Math Plan: District-Wide Reform in Math Teaching and Learning Presented by: Linda Ruiz Davenport, Director of Elementary.
THE DRAGON CONNECTION March Who are we?  Jefferson City Schools  Small, rural school district 60 miles north of Atlanta, 18 miles north of the.
Sharing in Leadership for Student Success DeAnn Huinker & Kevin McLeod, UWM Beth Schefelker, MPS 18 April 2008.
Math Study Group Meeting #1 September 16, 2014 Facilitator: Simi Minhas Math Achievement Coach, Network 204.
Research Indicators for Sustaining and Institutionalizing Change CaMSP Network Meeting April 4 & 5, 2011 Sacramento, CA Mikala L. Rahn, PhD Public Works,
DeAnn Huinker, UW-Milwaukee MMP Principal Investigator 26 August 2008 This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under.
SciencePLUS (Promoting Learning & Understanding for Students) Network A Federally Funded Project through the Math-Science Partnership and the Kentucky.
The Kentucky Framework for Teaching. BIG QuestionsLearning Targets What makes a teacher highly effective? How is teacher effectiveness determined? Why.
Master Teacher Academy East Dakota Educational Cooperative Vickie Venhuizen & Janeen Outka.
Milwaukee Mathematics Partnership External Evaluation Schools and School Leadership Report by Tanya Suarez, Suarez & Associates June 9, 2005.
Math and Science Partnership Program Approaches to State Longitudinal Evaluation March 21, 2011 San Francisco MSP Regional Meeting Patty O’Driscoll Public.
PRIMES Partnerships and Research Investigations with Mathematicians, Engineers, and Scientists Professional Development Model MSP Regional Meeting February.
Research and Evaluation Team Lines of Work Andy Porter, Director Building a Partnership – Susan Millar District Case Studies – William Clune Targeted Studies.
Governor’s Teacher Network Action Research Project Dr. Debra Harwell-Braun
CaMSP Cohort 8 Orientation Cohort 8 State and Local Evaluation Overview, Reporting Requirements, and Attendance Database February 23, 2011 California Department.
Mathematics and Science Partnerships: Summary of the FY2006 Annual Reports U.S. Department of Education.
Challenges and Trade-offs in Measuring the Outcomes of NSF’s Mathematics and Science Partnership Program: Lessons from four years on the learning curve.
Subgrant Goals and Activities Frostburg State University.
South Jersey Math/Science Partnership at Rowan University Dr. Eric Milou Dr. Jill Perry SJMP.
Jeremy Gabborin IU28 PIIC Coaching Mentor
Student Growth within the Teacher Professional Growth and Effectiveness System (TPGES) Overview 1.
Passport to Science MSP Science Program Indianapolis Public Schools.
Mathematics Performance Tasks Applying a Program Logic Model to a Professional Development Series California Educational Research Association December.
Statewide Evaluation Cohort 7 Overview of Evaluation March 23, 2010 Mikala L. Rahn, Ph.D.
Dr. Derrica Davis Prospective Principal Candidate: Fairington Elementary School.
Zimmerly Response NMIA Audit. Faculty Response Teacher input on Master Schedule. Instructional Coaches Collaborative work. Design and implement common.
Math Study Group Meeting #1 November 3, 2014 Facilitator: Simi Minhas Math Achievement Coach, Network 204.
Purpose of Teacher Evaluation and Observation Minnesota Teacher Evaluation Requirements Develop, improve and support qualified teachers and effective.
East Longmeadow Public Schools SMART Goals Presented by ELPS Leadership Team.
For the Students Students in elementary school right now have always used technology, classes seem outdated and boring to most because of the lack of.
PLCs Professional Learning Communities Staff PD. Professional Learning Committees The purpose of our PLCs includes but is not limited to: teacher collaborationNOT-
CaMSP Science Assessment Webinar Public Works, Inc. Sharing Lessons Learned in the Development and Use of Science Assessments for CaMSP Teachers and Students.
Coding Connections at the Interface of Algebra I and Physical World Concepts Improving Teacher Quality Grant Program Summer 2016.
MSP Summary of First Year Annual Report FY 2004 Projects.
CAEP Standard 4 Program Impact Case Study
Professional Development: Imagine Difference Shapes and Sizes
Teachers Teach Teachers:
Evaluation of An Urban Natural Science Initiative
PLCs Professional Learning Communities Staff PD
DREAM Developing Reading Education with Arts Methods
Evaluating the relationship between intensity of teacher professional development and student achievement in a Northern New Mexico inquiry-based science.
Presentation transcript:

WORKING TOGETHER TO IMPROVE SCIENCE EDUCATION PRESENTED BY GIBSON & ASSOCIATES A CALIFORNIA MATH AND SCIENCE PARTNERSHIP RESEARCH GRANT WISE II Evaluation Presentation

Presentation Overview General information about the WISE II program Discussion of evaluation methods Challenges and how we addressed them Our preliminary data results.

WISE II Partners  San Francisco Unified School District  San Francisco State University  Cal Academy of Sciences  City College of San Francisco  UC Museum of Paleontology

WISE II Program Description Based on the WISE I program, WISE II is a three-year research grant for teachers in grades 3-5 to improve their science content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and pedagogy. Teachers attend a summer workshop, 3 release days, and a Saturday session. Teachers receive in-classroom coaching and lesson planning support 1 to 4 times a month and meet collaboratively with their teams to plan curricula, discuss student achievement, and develop lessons.

Challenging Courses and Curricula for Teachers and Students CaMSP defines challenging courses and curricula as aligned with state content standards and frameworks, resulting in a greater number of students participating and succeeding in advanced courses. How do you evaluate challenging courses and curricula for elementary students and teachers?

Teacher Data Collection Tools Teacher Data Collection  Content Knowledge Assessment- Nationally Derived Tool  Additional Content Assessments – Locally Derived Tools  Pedagogical Questionnaires – Pre, Mid-Year, and Post  Professional Development Feedback Forms - Ongoing  Classroom Observations –twice a year  Student Notebooks Collected- twice a year  Use of a Control Group

Evaluation Methods Teacher Data Collection National Content Knowledge Assessments Local Content Assessments Pedagogical Questionnaires Formative Professional Development Feedback Pre-Post Test content knowledge test  Assessing Teacher Learning About Science Teaching ATLAST by Horizons Research. Assessing Teacher Learning About Science Teaching  Strength- piloted and tested and provides useful information about teacher practice and knowledge.  Challenge-not CA standards, not directly aligned to PD, and it’s difficult – so teachers do not enjoy taking it.

Evaluation Methods Teacher Data Collection National Content Knowledge Assessments Local Content Assessments Pedagogical Questionnaires Formative Professional Development Feedback Complement ATLAST with other content knowledge instruments:  Standards-based pre-post twice a year.  Faculty developed pre-post instruments given the day of the treatment. Teachers receive immediate feedback on what they have learned that day.

Evaluation Methods Teacher Data Collection National Content Knowledge Assessments Local Content Assessments Pedagogical Questionnaires Formative Professional Development Feedback Questionnaires Pre-Post & Formative Evaluations of PD  Pedagogical questionnaires examine frequency of practice & confidence in knowledge and instruction. They look at growth by individual teacher and area. We compare it to our control group.  After every PD session, we provide feedback forms that include questions on relevancy to standards and to instruction.

Control Group Not receive any similar treatment Willing to be in program for 3 years Willing to take additional student assessments Their own confidence in science teaching and instruction Stipend for participation Control teachers for WISE II  Not receive any WISE II “treatment”  Complete ATLAST pre-post tests.  Complete pedagogical questionnaires.  Two or more teachers at site participating in the program.  Students complete the pre-post tests.  Teacher commits to 3 years.  Likely to be in district and at grade level for three or more years- and their school willing to participate.

Control Group Easy: a. Have not participated in the program Hard: a. Have similar characteristics of those in the program. Challenge Competing programs and reforms Control group more experienced Higher baseline of performance. Resolution View data in terms of growth. Growth in student scores and growth in competencies, confidence, and practice.

Student Data Collection Tools Student Data Collection  Pre-Post Standards Based Content Knowledge Assessment  Additional Content Assessments –used locally by teachers  California Standards Test – review both ELA and Science  Classroom Observations – conducted twice a year  Student Notebooks Collected twice a year  Control Group to compare growth

Evaluation Methods Student Data Collection Pre-Post Tests CST Data Student Notebooks Classroom Observations STUDENT  Pre-post tests in science.  Look at growth in student outcomes on California Standards Test.  Use rubric to analyze student science notebooks content, structure, and understanding.  Observe engagement and learning process through classroom observations using a rubric.  Biggest challenge- lack of 3 rd, 4 th grade CST in science.

A SAMPLING OF PRELIMINARY DATA FOR WISE II RESULTS

CHANGES IN CST PERFORMANCE CHANGES IN PRE-POST TEST REVIEWED IN CONTEXT OF GRANT Student Outcomes

WISE teachers improved student science outcomes As compared to Control Group and the district classrooms, WISE II teachers experienced greater growth in science than their peers between 2008 and In particular, more WISE II teachers had fewer students in below basic bands on the CST and more students were proficient than the previous year.

Student outcomes in Science on the CST WISE II teachers showed an increase on the 5 th grade Science CST from the baseline 2008 year to 2009 year.

Pre-Post Test Results Review of student growth and average growth in Earth, Life, and Physical Science at each grade level and as compared to control group. Other student outcomes Treatment teachers had average double digit gains on pre-post science tests in every strand (earth, life, physical). Student results on Pre-Post tests analyzed by growth and by WISE program offerings and curricular practices.

Example of Pre-Post Analysis 3 rd grade areas of greatest change on the pre-post test of WISE II students

Standards Learned 80% of 3 rd grade WISE II areas with greatest growth – pre-to-post test were addressed in WISE. These topics were also seen in student observations and drawings in student notebooks. ES.4.b Students know the way in which the Moon's appearance changes during the four-week lunar cycle. ES.4.d Students know that Earth is one of several planets that orbit the Sun and that the Moon orbits Earth. PS.1.a Students know energy comes from the Sun to Earth in the form of light. PS.1.e Students know matter has three forms: solid, liquid, and gas.

CONTENT KNOWLEDGE CONFIDENCE PRACTICE Teacher Changes

Teacher outcome results WISE II teachers improved content knowledge based on pre- post assessments. Control Group teachers declined in content knowledge.

WISE II Teacher Content knowledge WISE II teachers made growth based on the local –standards-based assessment tool.

Treatment teachers increased quantity of instruction. 93% of treatment teachers reported teaching a minimum of 46 minutes per week, as opposed to 78% of the same teachers the previous year.

Treatment teachers increased use of effective science teaching strategies. Note-few changes for control group in these areas.

WISE II increased teacher confidence Based on baseline and post-treatment surveys, WISE II teachers were more confident in their use of the following instructional strategies: Teaching Comprehension Vocabulary Sketching and Drawing

Increased confidence and application WISE II teachers showed an average growth in frequency and confidence of application of effective instructional strategies in every area analyzed.

WISE II improved more than control group teachers. WISE II teachers improved their confidence and competence at a greater rate than the control group teachers in nearly every area.

WISE II – Other Data Collected and Analyzed  Observation Data  Student Science Notebooks  Feedback forms from Evaluations  Teacher Comments  Faculty Input-Changes

WISE II – Challenging Courses and Curricula For more information, Contact Nada Djordjevich Gibson & Associates ext. 207