slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Kim Banta & Brennon Sapp PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Kim Banta & Brennon Sapp

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 41

Kim Banta & Brennon Sapp - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 96 Views
  • Uploaded on

THE RIPPLE EFFECT OF PRINCIPAL BEHAVIOR: Improving Teacher Instructional Practices through Principal-Teacher Interactions. Kim Banta & Brennon Sapp

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Kim Banta & Brennon Sapp' - sydnee-cervantes


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

THE RIPPLE EFFECT OF PRINCIPAL BEHAVIOR:Improving Teacher Instructional Practices through Principal-Teacher Interactions

Kim Banta & Brennon Sapp

A Dissertation Defense presented to the University of Louisvillein partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Degreeof Doctor of Education

slide2

Goal of the Study

To discover how a specific set of principal-teacher interactions affect: Teacher Instructional Practices Student Performance Frequency & Focus of Teacher Conversations

Key Constructs

Page 11

research questions
Research Questions
  • RQ-1How will the treatment of principal-teacher interactions affect teachers’ instructional practices?
  • RQ-2 How will changes in teachers’ instructional practices, initiated by the set of principal-teacher interactions, affect student performance?
  • RQ-3How will changes in principal-teacher interactions affect the frequency and focus of teacher conversations with principals, students, and other teachers?

Page 11

conceptual framework
Conceptual Framework

Page 8-11, Figure 1

teacher instructional practices rq 1
Teacher Instructional PracticesRQ-1

RQ 1 - How will the treatment of principal-teacher interactions affect teachers’ instructional practices?

Methodology

slide7

Table 15

*Indicates a small effect size (0.2<d< 0.5); **Indicates a medium effect size (0.5<d< 0.8); ***Indicates a large effect size (d >0.8). (Cohen, 1988)

Table 15

Page 85

teacher instructional practices change in instructional practices
Teacher Instructional Practices(Change in instructional practices)
  • Teachers and principals differed in where they perceived improvement.
  • According to teachers, instructional practices improved in two domains – Planning & Preparation and Learning Environment.
  • According to principals, instructional practices improved in two domains – Instruction and Assessment
  • It is more difficult for principals to observe Planning & Preparation. Teachers have closer personal knowledge of Planning & Preparation and Learning Environment.

Pages 110

slide9

Table 16

Page 86

teacher instructional practices differences in the ratings of instructional practices
Teacher Instructional Practices(Differences in the Ratings of Instructional Practices)
  • Principals’ ratings of instructional practices were significantly different than teacher’s ratings of instructional practices in each domain.
  • Principals’ ratings of instructional practices were lower than the teachers instructional practices ratings in each domain.

Page 87-89 & 112

slide11

Teacher Instructional Practices(Differences in the Ratings of Instructional Practices)

  • Principals’ ratings of instructional practices are hypothesized to be more valid and reliable than teachers ratings.
    • Extensive procedures were used throughout the study to increase the reliability and validity of principal ratings – (see chapter three).
    • Principals are trained to be observers of instruction and therefore see changes in instruction that the teacher may not signify as improvement. (Fullan, 2005b)
    • According to Ross, 1985, Schacter & Thum 2004, found that teachers over-rated their quality of instructional practices on effort.
  • A review of the literature revealed that within other professions the validity of self evaluations vary depending on the actual quality of the individual performing the self-evaluation. (Dunning et al.,2003; Kruger & Dunning, 1999; and Yariv, 2009)

Page 87-89 & 112

slide13

Table 17

Page 90

slide14

Table 17

Page 90

slide15

Table 17

Page 90

slide16

Table 17

Page 90

slide17

Table 17

Page 90

high medium and low performing teachers validity of ratings
High, Medium, and Low Performing Teachers (Validity of Ratings)
  • High performing teachers rated their instructional practices equivalent to principal ratings.
  • Medium performing teachers rated their instructional practices higher than the principals by .3 to .4 of a performance level.
  • Low performing teachers rated their instructional practices higher than the principals by a full performance level.
  • Low performing and medium performing teachers rated the quality of their instructional practices equivalent to high performing teachers ratings. The principals did not.

Page 87-89 & 112

slide19

High Performing Teachers

(Change in the Quality of Instructional Practices)

Table 18

Page 91

slide20

Medium Performing Teachers

  • (Change in the Quality of Instructional Practices)

Table 19

Page 93

slide21

Low Performing Teachers

  • (Change in the Quality of Instructional Practices)

Table 20

Page 94

high medium and low performing teachers change in instructional practices
High, Medium, and Low Performing Teachers (Change in instructional practices)
  • High Performing teachers improved according to teacher self-ratings (.2*) and principal ratings (.29**).
  • Medium performing teachers perceived no change in the quality of their instructional practices and principals perceived essentially no change.
  • Low performing teachers improved according to teacher self-ratings (.2**) and principals (.19*)

Page 113-116

student performance rq 2
Student PerformanceRQ-2

RQ 2 -How will changes in teachers’ instructional practices, initiated by the set of principal-teacher interactions, affect student performance?

slide24

Figure 6

Page 97

slide25
d

Figure 7

Page 100

slide26

Figure 8

Page 101

slide27

Figure 9

Page 102

classroom grade distributions and discipline referrals improved
Classroom Grade Distributions and Discipline Referrals Improved
  • Percentage of As were higher than expected.
  • Percentage of Ds were higher than expected
  • Percentage of Fs were lower than expected.
  • Discipline referrals were lower than expected.
    • Mainly due to decreases in aggressive discipline and male discipline.
    • Freshman and senior discipline were impacted more than other grades.

Page 116

conceptual framework1
Conceptual Framework

Page 8-11, Figure 1

student performance indicators for high medium and low performing teachers
Student Performance Indicators for High, Medium and Low Performing Teachers
  • According to QIR ratings, high performing teachers, had the highest quality of instructional practices and improved them the most over the course of the year.
  • According to QIR ratings, medium performing teachers fell in the middle of the spectrum of teacher quality and did not improve.
  • According to QIR ratings, low performing teachers had the lowest quality of instructional practices according to the QIR and improved similarly to the high performing teachers.

Page 120-121

student performance indicators for high medium and low performing teachers1
Student Performance Indicators for High, Medium and Low Performing Teachers
  • If the overall quality of instructional practices were the main reason for improved grade distributions and discipline referrals then,
  • High Performing teachers would have the best grade distributions and lowest discipline referral number.
  • Medium Performing teachers would have the next best grade distributions and next lowest discipline referrals.
  • Low Performing teachers would have the worst grade distributions and the highest discipline referrals.
  • But according to data analysis, the classroom grade distributions and discipline referrals for high, medium and low performing teachers were equivalent.

Table 25 & Page 120-121

frequency focus of teacher conversations
Frequency & Focus of Teacher Conversations

RQ 3-How will changes in principal-teacher interactions affect the frequency and focus of teacher conversations with principals, students, and other teachers?

frequency and focus of teacher conversations2
Frequency and Focus of Teacher Conversations
  • According to teacher surveys, the frequency of principal-teacher conversations improved, but the focus remained unchanged.
  • According to teacher surveys, the frequency and focus of teacher-teacher conversations improved during the pilot year and maintained in the year of full implementation.
  • According to student surveys, the frequency and focus of teacher-student conversations remain unchanged.

Pages 103-108 & 122

findings
Findings
  • Teacher instructional practices improved according analysis of QIR data.
  • Student performance increased according to the analysis of student grade distributions and discipline.
  • Freq & Focus of some teacher conversations changed according to analysis of teacher and student surveys.

Pages 109

implications
Implications
  • Principal Visits and Collaboration with Teachers
  • Rubric Based Assessment of Instructional Practices
  • Working with Teachers of Differing Qualities of Instructional Practices

Page 126-128

unintended outcomes
Unintended Outcomes
  • Exiting Teachers
  • Principal-Student Relationships
  • Principal-Parent Discussions
  • Increased Job Satisfaction for the Principals

Page 130-132

recommendations for future research
Recommendations for Future Research
  • Further research on particular treatment needed for teachers at various levels of performance
  • How principal interactions in the classroom could strengthen and support the walk-through model currently used by many schools and districts
  • Research on this treatment in other settings (generalizability)
  • Individual effects of each of the four interventions used in this study

Page 133

this study s resolutions to central dilemmas of nearly all principals
This Study’s Resolutions to Central Dilemmas of Nearly all Principals
  • How can I find time to get into classrooms?
  • How do I engage teachers in job related conversations about instructional practices?
  • How do I get teachers to look at performance data of their students?
  • How can I increase principal job satisfaction?
  • How can I reduce discipline referrals?
  • How can I decrease failure rates (improve student grades) while increasing the quality of instructional practices?
  • How can I know the actual quality of instructional practices?

Table 28

Page 135

thank you
Thank You

Brennon Sapp Kim Banta

www.bsapp.com/administrative_behavior/index.htm