tqp update
DESCRIPTION
TQP Update. Columbus Airport Marriott Columbus, Ohio April 21, 2006. Today’s Agenda. Brief overview of TQP Sample findings from Cohorts I and II Benefits to IHEs Dissemination of data to IHEs and public Time for discussion. TASK FORCE COMMITMENT TO QUALITY OHIO TEACHER EDUCATION. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
TQP Update
Columbus Airport Marriott
Columbus, Ohio
April 21, 2006
Today’s Agenda
• Brief overview of TQP
• Sample findings from Cohorts I and II
• Benefits to IHEs
• Dissemination of data to IHEs and public
• Time for discussion
TASK FORCE COMMITMENT TO QUALITY OHIO TEACHER EDUCATION
• “Charged with the responsibility for preparing individuals to become teachers for Ohio’s children, we express our long standing and enduring commitment to ensure that every teacher licensed in Ohio is prepared to be competent, caring and committed to student learning. Recognizing and valuing our differing missions, sizes, locations, and students, we who are educators in both public and independent colleges and universities alike have used and will continue to use data, Ohio teacher licensure standards, systemic reviews, guidelines of learned societies, wisdom of practice, and other evidence to evaluate and strive to maintain high quality teacher education programs in this state.”
Signed by Public and Private Chairs for All 50 Institutions
TQP Research Questions
1. Do variables of teacher background, initial preparation, and on-going professional learning relate to teacher practices, student learning and achievement?
2. How do specific elements of teacher preparation and aspects of school contexts impact novice teachers’ development during their first three years of teaching?
3. Do HVATs have characteristics, instructional practices, and understandings that differ from other teachers along the value-added continuum?
4. What specific school contexts are associated with HVA novice and experienced teachers?
William Loadman, Ph.D
Ohio State University
TQP Leadership Team
Sandra Stroot, Ph.DOhio State University
Patricia Hart, Ph.DUniversity of Dayton
Stephanie Cappel, Ed.D.
University of Cincinnati
Judith Wahrman, Ph.D.
University of Findlay
Kent Seidel, Ph.D.University of
Cincinnati
Ohio Teacher Education Graduates
SEM SampleAEL
Novice
Sonja Smith, Ph.DMount Vernon
Nazarene University
Robert Yinger, Ph.DUniversity of
Cincinnati
FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008
’03-‘04 Cohort I
Pre-service Hard copy
N=1544
In-service HC/Web N=1051
In-service Web
In-service Web
In-service Web
’04-‘05
Cohort II Pre-service
HC N=4941
In-service HC/Web
In-service Web
In-service Web
’05-‘06
Cohort III Pre-service
HC/Web N=1500+
In-service HC/Web
In-service Web
’06-‘07
Cohort IV Pre-service
HC/Web
In-service HC/Web
’07-‘08
Cohort V Pre-service
HC/Web
Ohio teacher preparation programs are attracting academically talented students
21
21.4
22.52
18
19
20
21
22
23
ACT Score
National State Teacher CompletersTotal
Cohort I and II Teacher Completers GPA Scores
3.50 3.46 3.47
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
GPA
GP
A S
core
s
Private Public Total
Most Ohio teacher preparation graduates are still white and female
0.3 0 0 13
17
7 70.6 1 0.2 2 0.9 2 0.4
5
93
77
93
85
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Pe
rce
nta
ge
AmericanIndian/Alaskan
Black/AfricanAmerican
AsianAmerican
Hispanic Caucasion
Ohio TQP Completer Profile Ohio Student Profile Ohio Teacher Profile National Teacher Profile
2003-2005 Demographic Data: Frequency Count by Gender and Private/Public Status
5329
1660
2812
821
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Male Female
Gender
Frq
ue
nc
y
Public Private
Finding 1: Teacher preparation graduates feel well prepared to assess student learning
3.964.08 4.1
3.64
1
2
3
4
5
MeanScore
Preparation inAssessment
Use a variety of readingassessments
Evaluate if students arelearning
Work with parents andfamilies
Finding 2: Teacher preparation graduates feel less prepared to work with special needs and minority children
3.84 3.71
3.46
1
2
3
4
5
Mean Score
Foundation inmeeting the needs of
children withdisabilities
Addresses speciallearning needs
and/or difficulties
Address the needsof students fromdiverse culturalbackgrounds
Finding 3: Teacher preparation graduates feel well prepared to teach reading…less so in mathematics
4.03
3.19
1
2
3
4
5
Mean Score
Solid foundation in reading Solid foundation in mathematics
Finding 4: Teacher preparation graduates report positive clinical teaching experiences
4.294.13
1
2
3
4
5
Mean Score
Had opportunities to observeoutstanding veteran teachers
Had opportunities to haveoutstanding veteran teachers
explain their teaching
Finding 5: New Ohio teachers rate highly the work of teaching… but not their working conditions
6.185.76
5.59
5.03 5.02 4.82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Mean Score
Inte
ract
ions
with
stu
dents
Inte
ract
ion
with
col
leag
ues
Level
of p
erso
nal/p
rofe
ssio
nal c
halle
nge
Opp
ortuni
ties
for p
rofe
ssio
nal a
dvance
men
t
Gen
eral w
ork
cond
itions
Salar
y/fri
nge ben
efits
372
515
116 117
12
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
None < 1 Hour 1 - 3 Hours 3 - 5 Hours > 5 Hours
Hours a mentor spends observing in your classroom in an average week
Finding 6: New Ohio teachers report that their mentors spend little time observing in their classrooms
113
469
311
67 63
0
100
200
300
400
500
None < 1 Hour 1 - 3 Hours 3 - 5 Hours > 5 Hours
Hours spent with a mentor in an average week
Finding 7: New Ohio teachers spend little time with their mentors
StandardIndicator from BOE
Appreviated Planning Instrument
Preservice Item IHE Score Inservice Item IHE Score
A2 My program was coherent. A2 My program was coherent.
A4 I had the opportunity to develop understandings about teaching that were consistent across courses and clinical experiences.A3 The criteria by which I was evaluated as a student teacher were consistent with that I was taught in my methods courses.A29 My cooperating teacher that I spent most time with knew very little about my program's goals, requirements, or expectations.
B8 How well did these experiences prepare you to use technology in instruction
B8 How well did these experiences prepare you to use technology in instructionG16 Understanding of technology
1Content Knowledge:
Candidates know the subject matter to be taught
A5 My program required a strong disciplinary preparation that incorporated an understanding of a subject matter(s)' core concepts.
A3 My program required a strong disciplinary preparation that incorporated an understanding of a subject matter(s)' core concepts.
A7 My program gave me a solid foundation in mathematics.
A5 My program gave me a solid foundation in mathematics.
A8 My program gave me a solid foundation in reading.
A6 My program gave me a solid foundation in reading.
A9 My program was rigorous and academically challenging.
A7 My program was rigorous and academically challenging.
A11 Content in my program was supported by theoretical and empirical studies.
A9 Content in my program was supported by theoretical and empirical studies.
B12 How well did these experiences prepare you to plan instruction by using knowledge of learning, subject matter, curriculum, and student development
B12 How well did these experiences prepare you to plan instruction by using knowledge of learning, subject matter, curriculum, and student development
1
Content Knowledge: Candidates can explain
concepts in professional, state, and institutional
standards
B14 How well did these experiences prepare you to use the state's curriculum frameworks and performance standards to plan instruction.
B14 How well did these experiences prepare you to use the state's curriculum frameworks and performance standards to plan instruction.
D1 How would you rate your preparation coverage of the Ohio Academic Content Standards.
C1 How would you rate your preparation coverage of the Ohio Academic Content Standards.
D2 How would you rate your preparation coverage of the national standards in your content area
C2 How would you rate your preparation coverage of the national standards in your content area
D3 How would you rate your preparation coverage of Praxis II Standards
C3 How would you rate your preparation coverage of Praxis II Standards
D4 How would you rate your preparation coverage of Praxis III Standards
C4 How would you rate your preparation coverage of Praxis III Standards
1Pedagogical Content
Knowledge: Candidates know instructional strategies
H5 Teacher Beliefs: If a student did not remember information I gave in a previous lesson, I would know how to increase his/her retention in the next lesson.
E5 Teacher Beliefs: If a student did not remember information I gave in a previous lesson, I would know how to increase his/her retention in the next lesson.
H6 Teacher Beliefs: If a student in my class becomes disruptive and noisy, I feel assured that I know some techniques to redirect him/her quickly.
E6 Teacher Beliefs: If a student in my class becomes disruptive and noisy, I feel assured that I know some techniques to redirect him/her quickly.
G12 Teacher Beliefs: How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?
D12 Teacher Beliefs: How well can you implement alternative strategies in your classroom?
B9 How well did these experiences prepare you to choose different teaching strategies to meet the needs of different levels of students.
B9 How well did these experiences prepare you to choose different teaching strategies to meet the needs of different levels of students.
1
Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Candidates can
present in clear and meaningful ways
G5 Teacher Beliefs: To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?
D5 Teacher Beliefs: To what extent can you craft good questions for your students?
Alignment of Teacher Quality Partnership Survey Items and NCATE Indicators*
Conceptual Framework
Coherence
Conceptual Framework
Commitment to technology
Institutional Representatives – TQP and IHE Liaisons
• Fall OCTEO – share reports on all data collected to date
• Spring OCTEO – progress reports and interaction with TQP leadership team
Dissemination of Findings• IHE reports
– NCATE/survey data– Longitudinal report/Cross sectional report
• District reports– Inform mentorship and PD programs– Correlate with other data from ODE/district
• Statewide reports– http://www.tqpohio.org– Share at state and national conferences
Comments?
Questions?
Suggestions?