candidate impact on student learning process to product l.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Candidate Impact on Student Learning “ Process to Product” PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Candidate Impact on Student Learning “ Process to Product”

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 31

Candidate Impact on Student Learning “ Process to Product” - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Download Presentation
Candidate Impact on Student Learning “ Process to Product”
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

  1. Candidate Impact on Student Learning“Process to Product” Teresa McGowan Miami University and Cynthia J. Hammond Winston Salem State University

  2. Presentation Objectives 1. Identify processes that were used to develop knowledge bases for analyzing student learning; 2. Share the design process used to help candidates become assessment literate; 3. Present assessment examples that demonstrate candidates’ impact on student learning.

  3. OBJECTIVE #1: Identify processes that were used to develop knowledge bases for analyzing student learning Redesign of teacher education program with a shift to candidates • Examining the prior learning experiences of the students • Using the prior learning data to assess individual and group dynamics, determining focus of instruction, and the sequence of instruction; • Designing and implementing instruction that is meaningful, engaging for p-12 students, and is standards driven;

  4. OBJECTIVE #1 cont. Identify processes that were used to develop knowledge bases for analyzing student learning • Developing assessments that - measure the instructional objectives, - provide for authentic performance, and - are varied in order to address student cultural and intellectual diversity • Examine student performance data against multiple indicators i.e. previous performance, gender performance, group performance, readiness to progress to next learning text, etc.

  5. OBJECTIVE #1 cont.Identify processes that were used to develop knowledge bases for analyzing student learning • Candidates reflect on student data; instructional practices, comparative data, and changes or modifications for improving teaching and learning.

  6. OBJECTIVE 2:Share the design process used to help candidates become assessment literate How do teacher education programs design opportunities for candidates to become assessment literate? • Identify the knowledge (content) that candidates must acquire. • Provide opportunities for candidates to select, create and practice using assessments. - Identify the achievement levels expected for students.

  7. OBJECTIVE 2:Share the design process used to help candidates become assessment literate (cont.) • Design field experiences where candidates can have focused experiences with P-12 students • Develop plans with cooperating teachers to help student teachers design units that allow them to collect and analyze data derived from student learning, and be reflective about improving instruction. • Provide instructional lessons based on the modifications and re-analyze data on student performance to determine if improvement has occurred.

  8. OBJECTIVE 3:Present assessment examples that demonstrate candidates’ impact on P-12 student learning Project Learning Curve: An example of a key assessment used to measure impact on K-12 student learning.

  9. Genesis of Project Learning Curve • Initially a response to NCATE • Unit programs want to know how “effective” their graduates really are when it comes to P-12 learning impact • Parents want clear and direct evidence that their children have learned the desired content or skills of the lesson(s); evidence-based practice is alive and growing in P-12 education

  10. NCATE UNIT STANDARD # 1 • Candidates preparing to work in schools as teachers or other school personnel know the content of their fields, demonstrate professional and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions and apply them so that students learn. Assessments indicate that candidates meet professional, state, and institutional standards.

  11. NCATE’S Standard 1 Rubric: Element 7: Student Learning for Teacher Candidates Acceptable: Teacher candidates focus on student learning as shown in their assessment of student learning, use of assessments in instruction, and development of meaningful learning experiences for students based on their developmental levels and prior experience.

  12. To meet Unit Standard #1. . . • Specialized Professional Associations (SPAs) have developed, in conjunction with NCATE, report templates which require programs to use 6-8 key assessments to meet SPA standards. • A minimum of 6 assessments must be submitted. • Institutions may submit additional assessments when SPA does not specify all 8 assessments. • 5 assessments are common to all programs.

  13. Required Assessments • State licensure exam for program area. • Content Assessment • Assessment of Planning (e.g., unit plan) • Student Teaching/Internship • Assessment of candidate impact on student learning or providing a supporting learning environment.

  14. Assessment #5: Effects on Student Learning • Classroom Teachers: Assessment that demonstrates candidate effects on student learning, or • Other school personnel: on providing supportive learning environments for student learning.

  15. Six Outcomes for Assessment #5: Project Learning Curve • Evaluate student knowledge level • Plan instruction • Teach all learners • Assess • Analyze student learning • Reflect

  16. Project Learning Curve (PLC) • During student teaching, all teacher candidates must complete one comprehensive lesson plan that addresses four key areas: • Lesson Foundation • Instructional Plan • Assessment Plan • Student Learning Evidence

  17. Lesson Foundation • Lesson must fit into the curriculum of the school district (e.g., list of Ohio Academic Content Standards, Benchmarks, and Indicators connected to lesson), including connection to prior and future learning • Lesson delivery organization (e.g., introduction, instructional steps, closing) and procedures must be provided

  18. Instructional Plan • Instructional delivery must be directed toward all learners (differentiated instruction) • Multiple instructional strategies must be evidenced to address various learner needs • Multiple resources are used

  19. Assessment Plan • Each teacher candidate selects two learner assessment techniques (pre-/post-) based on the content to be taught, age level, and other instructional variables, including a rationale for the choices made • Full description of the data collection process, including how data was collected and the timetable

  20. Student Learning Evidence • Summary description of the learning results and the impact of instruction must be provided, including data charts to represent results • A personal reflection from the teacher candidate on the impact of the lesson on the students • A personal reflection from the teacher candidate on how this experience will influence future lessons and teaching in general

  21. Review Process • Eight weeks in the field, PLC is completed and sent into the Student Teaching office • University student teaching supervisors come together for training on the evaluation of the projects • Each project is reviewed by a university supervisor according to the project rubrics (rubrics given to each student before student teaching starts) • Rubrics provide ratings across the four areas of the project

  22. PLC Scoring • A composite score of 27 out of a possible 36 points is required in order to receive maximum credit for the project • During the scoring session, projects receiving a score below 27 are scored a second time by a member of the Dean’s office • Each PLC is scored and returned to every teacher candidate before the end of their student teaching semester • Candidates who are not successful are given the opportunity to resubmit their project

  23. General Findings • Based on initial findings, MU teacher candidates evidenced strong performances across all areas except assessment • Regarding assessment, students were competent in assessing prior knowledge/skill levels and selecting assessment procedures

  24. General Findings • The actual implementation of the techniques including the collection of data, the accuracy of the pre-post measures (if used), along with listing and describing the data results were more problematic • It seems as if the necessary practice and understanding of how the assessment process needed to work was not there for many of the students

  25. Our results. . .

  26. Implications • Weaker assessment performance is not unexpected given that this constitutes a new skill domain • A new tool for the “teacher tool box” • Data and evidence-based decision-making will only increase in the classroom setting • IHE’s need to make sure that teachers-to-be are well prepared for this new professional expectation

  27. What This Tells Miami • Greater emphasis on authentic and effective classroom assessment is needed within, and across, program curriculums • Effective content coverage along with connection to methods courses is important • Greater course content integration is necessary so that students have multiple opportunities to connect previously learned assessment skills with new content and learning/instructional experiences • Ongoing collaboration and inter-departmental dialogue is essential as these instructional practices are evaluated and refined

  28. NCATE PERSPECTIVES • Teacher preparation must focus on the outcome of education—student learning. • Content knowledge, pedagogical processes and skills are critical means but not ends of professional educator preparation.

  29. CONCLUSION. . . • When evidence is assembled, assessment results should demonstrate candidates’ successful preparation to perform as teachers in *Judging prior learning *Planning instruction *Teaching to engage all students *Assessing *Analyzing results in terms of student learning *Reflecting on changes in teaching

  30. Our own reflections • PLC has been revised for the 2007-2008 academic year • Lesson Foundation and Instructional Plan sections have been combined • Research Knowledge Base section has been added • Tasks of the assessment are more clearly outlined

  31. RESOURCE • Student Learning in NCATE Accreditation by Emerson Elliott • Web address for this publication: