• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Exploring effectiveness of teacher leader support
 

Exploring effectiveness of teacher leader support

on

  • 192 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
192
Views on SlideShare
188
Embed Views
4

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

1 Embed 4

http://acumenresearcheval.com 4

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • The goal of LEADERS is to improve science education by making it relevant to students through the incorporation of Project-Based Science (PBS) that is linked to the renewable energies industry and its environmental impacts, which is becoming a vital element in the economic development of the Great Lakes Region. We aim to create teacher leaders who can modernize the science curriculum and increase student achievement.
  • The pedagogical focus of the grant is on Project-Based Science, which engages children in scientific inquiry that captures the core components of scientific reasoningIterative; long term; and focused on a student generated driving question“As students work to complete the product, they have opportunities to ask and refine questions, design and conduct scientific investigations, gather, manipulate and make sense of data, use technology in ways that mirrors the work of scientists, and collaborate with classmates and community professionals.”
  • - LEADERS gathers and merges the expertise of four essential entities in the economic revitalization of the Great Lakes Region—K-12 school districts, higher education, the renewable energy industry, and informal education. -The MSPpartnership focuses on student-centered education that knits community economic growth with science education. -Specifically, teacher leaders and district level support personnel collaborate with university, industry, and informal science partners in the development of Project-Based Science (PBS) curricula that will unite education with community.
  • Thinking about learners and knowledge together, for example, might make the teacher consider the appropriateness of the content, the standards that the state has adopted to guide curriculum choices, or the context in which the content should be made available for learners.LISA: I deleted the subsequent slides because I don’t think people need to read a list of what each of these circles entails. Instead, summarize for them using just this slide.
  • GALE starts here: To gain an understanding of the TLs strengths, weaknesses, and propensity towards implementing PBS, we administered STEBI and STIPS instruments and triangulated with observations and interviews. Science teachers’ orientations toward inquiry and traditional noninquiryinstructional ideology were measured by the STIPS. In general, we found that while the TLs were improving in content mastery, some resistance to inquiry-based instruction remained and a clear understanding of what PBS entails was not evident.
  • Early evaluation findings suggested that there are obstacles hindering TL implementation of PBS. While the project design appeared to have sufficient resources and supports to enable TLs to effectively implement PBS, it just wasn’t happening. We began by comparing the degree to which TLs made use of resources and supports with their profile.
  • SNA provides the tools to empirically test our propositions about our MSP. It provides a view the nature of relationships—whether they are reciprocal or not—as well as the examination of social capital (the value or expected benefits of relationships). When we designed our initial survey, we decided to focus on just the entities within the partnership that teacher leaders could use as resources and support. We also limited our examination to a one directional study—we only surveyed the teacher leaders to determine first, which resources they utilized most frequently. We followed our SNA with a focus group interview to gain more insight to quality or social capital issues.
  • Questions asked TLIn your role as a Teacher Leader, 1. How frequently do you confer with the following concerning science content during the school year 2. How frequently do you confer with the following concerning science teaching methods such as inquiry and project-based science during the school year 2010-20113. During the current school year, how often have you attended the following professional development activities outside of LEADERS
  • I will start with the overall grouped social network analysis sociogram above. It displays the network between LEADERS participants and their resources available for use with science teaching methods and a cross comparison with professional development for instructional strategies. The legend has been included to guide the charting and properties of the sociogram. Edge width is indicative of the level of engagement (collaboration) the participants had with their resources. Larger edge widths equate to higher levels of engagement. Vertex properties do not apply to this graph due to grouping, but play a prominent role in the sociograms of individual teachers, which will be addressed later.The edge filters have been set to 2 through 7, which correspond with our survey—the survey outputs as an excel file, so a 2 is indicative of yearly engagement and a 7 indicative of daily engagement. In between, in numeric order, are quarterly (3), monthly (4), bi-monthly (5), and weekly engagement (6). These will be presented in detail later on other sociograms. We wanted to track what resources were being used, not those being unused, 1 (no engagement) has been excluded on all of the sociograms. The above sociogram shows that the greatest engagement of resources occurs within the participants own school districts, the internet, professional journals, and LEADERS teacher leaders. These makeup the core resources used for science teaching methods. As the graph demonstrates there are clear patterns demonstrated by both groups. While there are some differences, the overarching patterns remain consistent—there is limited use of university resources and professional scientists. These patterns will become more apparent when observed in greater detail below.
  • When observed from a yearly to bi-monthly standpoint we can see that there is engagement with university and professional resources, but not on a frequent basis. Again, vertex properties do not apply due to grouping, edge properties remain constant. There are some differences between groups at this level, but this could be due to resources availability and each group’s subsequent networks, which are not displayed here. For example, TPS uses graduate students and university scientists and engineers more often than TCS, but TCS may not have the network or contacts in place to use these resources on a regular basis.
  • Now, as we shift from a yearly to bi-monthly perspective, to a bi-monthly to daily view, we can see some staggering patterns. University resources are completely unused with the exception of science education faculty by TPS and there is only limited use of local professional scientists. There are some group differences in this sociogram, but, overall, patterns remain consistent—there is either limited or no use of university resources across-the-board. Again, this could be due to network differences and limitations—TPS could already have a network and contacts in place to work with university science education faculty, while TCS does not. An intimate look into each group’s respective networks could establish why these shortcomings exist.
  • We will switch gears now and take an in-depth look at the networks of individual teachers within TPS and TCS from a yearly to bi-monthly standpoint. In the following sociograms vertex properties are applicable and edge properties remain constant. The vertices give us two pieces of information: (1) the size of the vertex tells us how much LEADERS professional development each individual teacher completed for instructional strategies and (2) the opacity of each vertex is a measure of how much professional development for instructional strategies each teacher did outsideof LEADERS. For example, look at vertex “TPS_B”; this vertex is very large and very opaque—this tells us that this teacher did a large amount of professional development within LEADERS, but that they also did a large amount of professional development outside of LEADERS for instructional strategies. As can be seen there are not only emergent patterns between groups, but between individuals as well—on an individual level we can see that very few teachers use university and professional resources. If the opposite was true we would not see only 5 or 6 edges conjoining with a vertex, but we would see 10 to 12 edges conjoining with each vertex (there were 12 participants in the sample). Again, this could be due to network limitations—the individual teachers do not have the networks in place to contact university and professional scientists, graduate students, etc.
  • In our final sociogram we will take a look at the individual participants’ use of resources on a bi-monthly to daily level. This is a dramatic graph—we can clearly see that university faculty, graduate students, and even professional resources are rarely used by individual teachers on a regular basis. Again, like stated before, this could be due to individual network differences and availability of resources for each individual. For example, “TCS_E” has a network with 6 edges protruding from the vertex (we would say this vertex has a degree of 6) and “TPS_D” has only one edge connected to the vertex. “TCS_E” could have a larger network because they have greater networking capabilities, greater resources, etc. as compared to the limited network of “TPS_D” (degree of 1).
  • The focus group interview allowed us to examine social capital issues so that we could incorporate them into our next version of the LDRS network survey. Overall, the supports/resources they made use of the most were those that were specifically designed for them as they develop and provide PD to the district teachers. #1 resource—network coach. #2—each other. #3, co-workers who they have developed relationships with as a result of providing PD. TLs noted that there are some resources/supports that they just don’t think of using them. Some STEM professors have made suggestions and as a result, the teachers are more conscious of how STEM faculty might participate in the professional development planning and implementation and are going to use their help more. local industry and scientists. Some teachers have used local scientists, some have not, and some expressed that they were somewhat aware of scientists that might coordinate with their professional development. In one instance the scientist who visited a classroom was over some of the students’ heads which led some teachers to prefer using a professor. One teacher was reluctant to cold call scientists and science-based industry because there was an expectation that any participation would be over the students’ heads. However, after some of the teachers visited science sites and realized what they might do, they took their classes. They felt the network coach might be instrumental in screening scientists. They also felt that a directory of professors and scientists along with areas of expertise, field trips, and how they might connect with science standards would be a helpful resource.

Exploring effectiveness of teacher leader support Exploring effectiveness of teacher leader support Presentation Transcript

  • Leadership for Educators: Academy for Driving Economic Revitalization in Science LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools. Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 Exploring the effectiveness and utilization of teacher leader support and resources through social network analysis
  • Project Goal To improve science education by making it relevant to students through the incorporation of Project- Based Science (PBS) that is linked to the renewable energies industry and its environmental impacts. Leadership for Educators: Academy for Driving Economic Revitalization in Science (LEADERS) is a mathematics and science partnership grant funded by the National Science Foundation. Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools.
  • Student learning is focused on the creation of a product that stems from a complex driving question. LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools. Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 Project-Based Science
  • Project Overview Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools.
  • Stage 2: Collaborate & Implement Leadership of Others Stage 3: Advocate & Systematize Leadership in the Extended Community Stage 1: Know & Model Leadership of Self Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 (Adapted from the PRIME Leadership Framework; NCSM, 2008) LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools. PRIME Leadership Framework
  • (Adapted from Loucks-Horsley, et al, 2003) Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools. Framework for Transforming Teachers into LEADERS
  • Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000) LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools. How People Learn Framework Community
  • Teacher Leaders’ Profiles • Science Teacher Self Efficacy Instrument (STEBI, Riggs & Enochs, 1990 ) • Science Teacher Ideological Preference Scale (STIPS, Jones & Hearty, 1978) • Horizon Inside the Classroom Observation Protocol for Science (Horizon Research, Inc., 2003) • Personal Interviews • Observations
  • Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools.
  • Social Network Analysis
  • Supports Science teachers at your school School principal Science teachers in your district Other district principals Graduate students in science/engineering Graduate students in education University scientists/engineers University science education faculty Local professional scientists Community resources like science museum LEADERS Network Coach LEADERS support staff
  • Findings
  • Findings
  • Findings
  • Findings
  • Findings
  • Interpretation & Follow Up
  • Next Steps SURVEY Revise survey to include social capital variables Expand survey to include all partners to examine reciprocal relationships Create an “expected network” sociogram for comparison PROJECT Bring partners together to develop a mapping of resources and ways in which partners might work together
  • • How can MSPs determine whether their teacher leader preparation and support model is effective? • What is the relationship between teacher leader use of the MSP supports and resources and effective STEM teaching? • What types of supports do teacher leaders use most and least frequently? • How can identification of teacher leader supports linked with effective STEM teaching outcomes inform the MSP program improvement? Funded by the National Science Foundation Grant # 0927996 LEADERS is a partnership of the The University of Toledo, Toledo Public Schools, Toledo Catholic Schools, and Monroe County Schools. Questions for Dialogue: