TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS: CREATING A FEEDBACK LOOP Peter W. Bates, Michigan State University

1
TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS CREATING A FEEDBACK
LOOPPeter W. Bates, Michigan State University
2
Promoting Rigorous Outcomes in Mathematics and
Science PROM/SE
3
PROM/SE Partners

• Ingham County Intermediate School District,
  Michigan
• St. Clair County Intermediate School District,
  Michigan
• Calhoun County Intermediate School District,
  Michigan
• SMART Consortium, Cleveland, Ohio Area
• High AIMS Consortium, Cincinnati, Ohio Area
• Michigan State University (Lead partner)

4
PROM/SE Scope
70 school districts 1400 PROM/SE
associates 5000 inservice teachers 800
preservice teachers 400,000 K-12 students
5

• Project Leaders
• Joan Ferrini-Mundy, Associate Dean,
• Science and Mathematics Education,
• MSU College of Natural Science
• William Schmidt, MSU Distinguished Professor,
• College of Education
• Co-PIs
• George Leroi, Dean, MSU College of Natural
  Science
• Peter Bates, Chair, MSU Department of
  Mathematics
• Terry Joyner, Director of Curriculum,
• Cincinnati Public Schools

6
PROM/SE is a comprehensive research and
development effort to improve mathematics and
science teaching and learning in grades K-12.
PROM/SE is based on

• assessment of students
• surveys of teachers and principals
• improvement of standards
• professional development of teachers
• preparation of preservice teachers

7
PROM/SE Goals for Mathematics and Science
Education

• Build reform efforts on a base of empirical
  evidence
• Develop challenging content standards and align
  instruction with those standards
• Provide professional development based on
  disciplinary content, standards, and evidence
• Reform the preparation of future teachers
• Improve student learning in science and
  mathematics

8
PROM/SE is an Evidence-based Research and
Development Initiative to Improve Mathematics and
Science Teaching and Learning in Grades K-12

• PROM/SE Strategies
• Create the research database
• Assess student knowledge in mathematics and
  science
• Survey teachers and principals regarding
  mathematics and science preparation and
  instructional approaches

9
PROM/SE Strategies cont.

• Using the research data
• Improve mathematics and science curriculum
  standards
• Design and provide effective professional
  development for comprehensive mathematics and
  science curricula
• Review and reform the teacher preparation in
  mathematics and science

10
Teachers for a New Era

11
What is TEACHERS FOR A NEW ERA?

• national effort to strengthen K-12 teaching by
  developing state-of-the art schools of education
• expected to directly influence public policy
  leaders concerned with the quality of the
  nations teachers
• funded by the Carnegie, Ford, Rockefeller and
  Annenberg Foundations
• 5-year, 5,000,000 grant, requires 5,000,000
  match
• catalytic reform of teacher education as a
  university-wide undertaking

12
TNE Design Principles

• Decisions driven by evidence
• Engagement with the Arts and Sciences
• Teaching as an academically taught clinical
  practice profession

13
MSU TNE Focus Centrality of Content and Context
14
Content is Central

• Instructional content key to student achievement
• Content knowledge for teachers focus on what is
  important for teaching

15
Context is Central

• Teaching is bifocal work one eye on
  content and the other on the student.
• Knowledge of students enables teachers to
  capitalize on student assets
• Knowledge of their students communities
  helps teachers make instructional connections

16
Crucial Part of TNE and PROM/SEEvaluation of
Teacher Education Programs

• WHAT MUST BE EVALUATED?
• Coursework, i.e. academic preparation, including
  Education, Content Area, and Field experience
• Outcomes

17
Coursework

• Who is providing the instruction (regular
  faculty, graduate students, adjuncts)
• Does the content match standards (pedagogical
  and disciplinary)?
• Do the field experiences offer good models?
• Are they good mentors?
• How much field experience?
• How often?
• How early?

18
OUTCOMES

• Typically, programs survey graduates and
  employers
• It would also be helpful to assess what teachers
  know and can do.
• How effective are these teachers in helping their
  pupils learn?
• Can this be measured?

19

• Example survey compiled by D.J. Freeman
• Study by D. L. Ball

20
(No Transcript)
21
What happens when you divide by 0?
22
Student teacher 1
Student teacher 2
23
Student teacher 3
24
Performance of pupils of graduates

• Ed Begle (early 70s) surveyed all literature
  whose focus was to correlate teacher knowledge to
  effectiveness (in terms of student learning)
• There are no experts that can distinguish
  effective from ineffective teachers based on
  easily observable characteristics.
• Similarly, the effects of a teachers subject
  matter knowledge and attitudes on student
  learning seem to be far less powerful than most
  of us had realized.
• However, Monk (1994) found a weak but positive
  correlation between teacher knowledge and student
  learning

25
Challenges Evaluating Teachers through Pupil
Performance

• Threat of evaluation narrows the curriculum
• Is the data reliable?
• What factors must be taken into account?
• Making sure that evaluation information is used

26
REMEMBER
Not everything that counts can be counted. Not
everything that can be counted counts A.
Einstein