Tappingprettybare LsearchP Phone o Tappingprettybare e Phone z
Alt s Alt aSexy%20Wallpaper%20Porn%20videocf%C3%A1nk%C3%A9sdzsem%20zkraf%C3%A1nk%C3%A9sdzsem%20zkrc Phone m
Alt Alt
Being a teacher with forty years experience in a diverse set of schools, classrooms, and demographics, it never ceases to amaze me that others involved in education, i.e. so-called professional analysts and observers, actually spend time and, of course, make money investing their energies in a continuous painful elaboration of the obvious.
To Rudy,
Well, Rudy, what is it that is so “obvious?” If you have the answer to how the testing should be done so teachers can be trained in effective teaching methods, please do elaborate!
Thanks for listening.
Laura
How do we know if a teacher is effective? Can we trust state tests of math and reading, as were used in the Cincinnati Public Schools study? What evidence exists that state tests truly measure achievement, i.e., understanding — rather than skill at memorization? We might need a different kind of test, to measure meaningful improvement of instruction.
I am Co-Director of the Modeling Instruction Program at Arizona State University (MW_nation.html
To measure teacher effectiveness, we use research-validated concept inventories, for example the Force Concept Inventory (FCI), a 30-question multiple choice instrument. Teachers give them to their students as pre-tests and post-tests. By looking at student choices on individual questions, a teacher can tell where they need to improve their instruction. You can read about the FCI at
R&E/Research.html
A research-validated OBSERVATIONAL instrument to evaluate teacher effectiveness in concept understanding in K-16 science and math is the RTOP: Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol. Through extensive research, it has been found to correlate well with the FCI and other concept inventories.
Thus we encourage teachers to use the RTOP self-assessment to monitor what they do in the classroom. The RTOP is a useful instrument for external evaluators to use; in fact, it is required in Arizona Math-Science Partnership grants.
I quote from the RTOP Reference Manual:
“The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) was created by the Evaluation Facilitation Group of the Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers (ACEPT). It is an observational instrument designed to measure “reformed” teaching.
The RTOP was designed to capture the current reform movement, and especially those characteristics that define “reformed teaching.” To do that, the authors of the RTOP relied heavily upon research in mathematics and science education and on the new national standards.
The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) has proven highly worthwhile in the study of mathematics and science classrooms in middle and high schools, colleges and universities. With appropriate training, it is possible to achieve very high inter-rater reliabilities using this instrument. RTOP scores predict improved student learning in mathematics and science classrooms at all levels.
Analysis of the RTOP suggests that it is largely a uni-factorial instrument that taps a single construct of inquiry. A finer-scale analysis lends new meaning to the phrases “pedagogical content knowledge” and “community of learners.” The instrument seems amply able to measure what it purports to measure: reformed teaching. ”
These four weblinks to the RTOP are at R&E/Research.html .
* Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) evaluation instrument, its history, research, & results.
(rtop/)
* RTOP Self-Assessment (A guide for science and math teachers to reflect upon their teaching. An adaptation of the RTOP by Drew Isola, a high school teacher)
* RTOP online training
* RTOP videos in streaming format
There are two comments that I have.
First is that the current fad for value added used as a major factor in evaluations is misplaced. The problem is that research shows value added to be highly variable and only about 14% reliable. It may be reliable if it is averaged over 5 years, but that is not what is anticipated.
Secondly, it looks like the teacher observation protocol is based on conventional didactic teaching. the RTOP reforemed teacher evaluation protocol has been found to be a good predictor of success in science classes. Essentially the large body of research shows that interactive engagement inquiry classes show much higher gains than conventional didactive classes. Anyone who looks at PER (physics education research) will find that all evidence points in this direction, and there is no evidence for standard lecture based classes working as well.
A good example of how dramatic this can be is the recent article :
The implications of a robust curriculum in introductory mechanics, Chance Hoellwarth and Matthew J. Moelter,
American Journal of Physics — May 2011 — Volume 79, 5, pp. 540
By using the same methods all instructors achieved the same either low or high results. The high results came from the reformed methods. This experiment has essentially been replicated many times since the early 90s and there are a large number of papers showing how reformed practices yield large gains in both college and HS. Unfortunately this research has not received much notice by the educational establishment.
A teacher evaluation protocol that does not recognize this will lock the schools into inferior practices.
[...] and use of these data-driven practices in their classrooms. That is happening in Washington, D.C., Cincinnati, Houston, and other [...]
I was pleased to read this research relating objective measurement of student performance improvement to objective measures of teacher skills, because it gives some confirmation to our “common-sense” belief that students will learn better if teachers develop a broad range of appropriate skills.
The practical question that arises from such conclusions, though, is how can we facilitate real improvement in teacher skills in a way that can be afforded on a long-term basis by schools and school systems.
Readers may be interested in a project we have been working on in some Christian schools in Australia called “Avenues to Teaching Excellence”. In this project, we have adapted and expanded (with permission) Charlotte Danielson’s rubrics and developed a supervised peer/colleague evaluation process. The evaluation is focused on identifying the teacher’s developmental needs rather than an exhaustive appraisal across all of the skill areas. Because the evaluation is so focused, it can be handled, without huge time-sacrifice, by a relatively competent and experienced teaching colleague under the supervision of a school leader. The evaluation is followed by a collaborative process for writing and executing developmental goals and strategies to improve the teacher’s skills.
Interested readers can see a brief overview of the project at zLazio Tappingprettybare Pl E Alt Personals Phone Rq S Fucking Attractive Stripped Teachers Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness : Education Nextb Women oLazio Tappingprettybare Pl E Alt Personals Phone Rq S Fucking Attractive Stripped Teachers Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness : Education Nextd q e e Nudity Fucking Attractive Stripped Teachers Fucking Attractive Stripped Teachers