Transcript Do Different Higher Education Teacher Education Programs

EXPLORING PRE-SERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION:
IMPACT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
INSTITUTIONS ON PUPIL MATHEMATICS
PERFORMANCE
Mary E. Yakimowski and Mary Truxaw
Presentation at the annual meeting for the
Northeastern Educational Research Association
Rocky Hill, Connecticut
October 2011
Linking to Other Presentations
Elementary Schools
Middle Schools
High Schools
Rhode Island
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Perspectives
“Facts”
Private Schools
Public Schools
A Great Education Begins with Great Teachers
Teachers for a New Era (TNE) - An initiative
designed to improve teacher quality by
reforming outstanding teacher preparation
programs
Design Principles
1. Emphasize to preservice teachers the
importance of demonstrating student
achievement through evidence.
2. Fully integrate faculty from the liberal arts and sciences,
enriching future teachers' general and subject matter
knowledge.
3. Support will be extended to beginning teachers from
their individual colleges and universities.
Focus on how the UConn Neag School
of Education is examining K-12
performance
More specifically, we would like to examine the patterns of
Connecticut’s grade 3-8 pupils of graduates of our
Teaching Education Program as part of our
Neag Assessment Plan through our
Teachers for a New Era project
Literature Review
 High-quality teacher education programs take on an
important role (Bransford, Darling-Hammond & LePage, 2005; Darling-Hammond, 2006)
 Lack of empirical evidence connecting teacher education
programs with student outcomes (Crowe, 2010; Grossman, 2008)

Teachers have been found to be critically important in
students’ mathematical learning and performance (Ball, 2003; Ball,
Lubienski & Mewborn, 2001; Fennema & Franke,1992; Shulman, 1987)

There are significant interests in examining growth
achievement models (e.g., Barone, 2009)
Purpose of This Study

Examine the impact of teacher education
experiences at higher education levels on
pupil performance in mathematics.

Differences on pupil performance in
mathematics between UI group vs. Non-UI
group
Sampling


5 public school districts in Connecticut
12,047 students from grades 3 through 8
Instrumentation
 The fourth generation of Connecticut Mastery
Test (CMT-4) mathematics portion
 Grades 3 through 8 in the spring at each year
5 domains and 25 corresponding strands in
CMT-4 math test are tested:





Numerical and Proportional Reasoning
Geometry and Measurement
Working with Data: Probability and Statistics
Algebraic Reasoning: patterns and functions
Integrated Understanding
__________________________________________________________________________
Numerical and Proportional [NP]
1. Place Value
2. Pictorial Representations of Numbers
3. Equivalent Fractions, Decimals and Percents
4. Order, Magnitude and Rounding of Numbers
5. Models for Operations
6. Basic Facts
7. Computation with Whole Numbers and Decimals
8. Computation with Fractions and Integers
9. Solve Word Problems
10. Numerical Estimation Strategies
11. Estimating Solutions to Problems
12. Ratios and Proportions
13. Computation with Percents
Geometry and Measurement [GM]
14. Time
15. Approximating Measures
16. Customary and Metric Measures
17. Geometric Shapes and Properties
18. Spatial Relationships
Working with Data: Probability and Statistics [DPS]
19. Tables, Graphs and Charts
20. Statistics and Data Analysis
21. Probability
24. Classification and Logical Reasoning
Algebraic Reasoning: Patterns and Functions [AR]
22. Patterns
23. Algebraic Concepts
Integrated Understanding [IU] (May include content from one or more of the four
domains)
25. Mathematical Applications
__________________________________________________________________________
Specifically, our objectives are to:
1. Measure the impact of teacher education
experiences in higher education on pupil
performance in mathematics.
2.
Interpret the findings and provide
recommendations for a modified model
to evaluate teacher preparation programs
in higher education institutions.
Overview of Results





Total (Raw) Score
Domain Scores
Strand Scores
Proficiency Level Scores
Vertical Scale Scores
Research Question
Overall mathematics achievement for pupils educated by
UI alumni? Is it any different from pupils of alumni from
other institutions?
Scores
Overall
raw
score
Type
Other
Descriptive, 1 year
t-test
Five mathematics domains scores for pupils educated by
5
UI alumni? Is performance in the domains for these pupils domain
any different from pupils of alumni from other
scores
institutions?
Descriptive, 1 year
t-test
25 mathematics strand scores of pupils of UI alumni? Is
25
this performance any different from pupils of alumni from strands
other institutions?
Descriptive, 1 year
t-test
Pattern in pupil proficiency status for those educated by UI Proficie Proportion
alumni? Is the performance any different from pupils of
ncy
analysis
alumni from other institutions?
level
Overall pupil mathematics achievement for those educated Vertical
by UI alumni after controlling for initial difference on
scale
earlier achievement? Is it any different from pupils of
alumni from other institutions?
ANCOVA
1 year
Covariate:
last year’s
results
Overall score
UI was 106 (SD = 22.8)
Non-UI of 95.3 (SD = 26.8)
Domain 1 –
Numerical / Proportional
UI
Non-UI
53.3
46.4
similar results for
each domain
Domain 1 - Strand Score Results
Domain 1 - Strand Score Results
Domain 2 - Strand Score Results
CMT-4 Geometry and Measurement [GM] domain’s five strand scores for two teacher groups.
Overview of Findings to Each Research Qs
1
2
3
4
5
Research Question
Scores
What is the overall pupil mathematics
achievement educated by UI alumni? Is it
any different from alumni from other
institutions?
What are the five mathematics domains
scores educated by UI alumni? Is the pupil
performance any different from alumni from
other institutions?
Overall raw UI score (106.1) > Non-UI score
score
(95.3); statistically significant
5 domain
scores
Results
UI Domain scores > Non-UI
Domain scores; statistically
significant; e.g., for Domain1, UI
score (53.3) > Non-UI score
(46.4); statistically significant
What are the 25 mathematics strand scores
25 strands UI Strand scores > Non-UI Strand
from UI alumni? Is the pupil performance
scores; statistically significant;
any different from alumni from other
e.g., for Strand 9, UI score (5.6) >
institutions?
Non-UI score (4.6); statistically
significant
What is the pattern in pupil proficiency
Proficiency 76% of UI and 60% of Non-UI in
status by those educated by UI alumni? Is
level
the Goal and Advanced categories;
the pupil performance any different from
9% of UI and 20% of Non-UI in
alumni from other institutions?
the Below Basic and Basic
categories
What is the overall pupil mathematics achievement Verti
UI score (536.7) > Non-UI score
educated by UI alumni after controlling for initial
cal
(525.6); statistically significant
difference on earlier achievement? Is it any
scale
after controlling for initial
different from alumni from other institutions?
difference on earlier achievement
Proficiency Level
Level
Below Basic
Basic
Proficient
Goal
Advanced
Non-UI
UI
%
9.1
10.7
20.4
32.6
27.2
%
4.2
4.4
15.4
36.2
39.8
Vertical Scale Results
Groups
n
Unadjusted
2007-2008
Non-UI
UI
9072
816
513.0
534.2
Unadjusted
2008-2009
Adjusted
2008-2009
541.3
564.2
542.6
549.1
F
Between-Subjects Effects
Intercept
MAVS2007-2008
Teacher Group
3914.3
32283.6
36.6
p
0.001***
0.001***
0.001***
Discussion
Two groups
 Limitations
 Modified
 Impact of programs
 Future Research

As noted by Education Secretary Duncan … at
an annual meeting of the American Association of
College of Teacher Education in February of 2010 in
Atlanta, saying,
“To put it in the simplest terms, we believe
teacher-preparation programs should be focused
on results.”
Aligned with charge, we do contend that we
must continue to strive to build an evidence-based
teacher preparation model, which is directly linked
to pupil academic performance; however, it is
simply one piece as a puzzle to really evaluate a
teacher education program.
HTTP://WWW.EDUCATION.UCONN.EDU/ASSESSMENT/
EXPLORING
PRE-SERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION:
IMPACT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
INSTITUTIONS ON PUPIL MATHEMATICS
PERFORMANCE
Mary Truxaw and Mary E. Yakimowski