• Save
Ohio Resident Education Program Evalaution
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,062
On Slideshare
569
From Embeds
493
Number of Embeds
3

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 493

http://oerc.osu.edu 480
http://www.oerc.osu.edu 11
http://www.pinterest.com 2

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Ohio Education Research Center Conference June 28, 2012
  • 2.  Overview of the Ohio Resident Educator Program RE Program Evaluation Design and Plan Resident Educator Program Year 1 and Beyond Changing the Landscape of Teaching in Ohio Discussion
  • 3.  Miami University, Evaluation & Assessment Center – Dr. Sarah Woodruff University of Cincinnati, Evaluation Services Center – Dr. Debbie Zorn; and College of Education, Criminal Justice and Human Services – Dr. Julie Morrison Ohio University, Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs – Dr. Marsha Lewis and Dr. Holly Raffle
  • 4.  Substantial investment in development and implementation Resource and infrastructure needs will continue to escalate as program grows to scale by Fall 2014 Significant component of Ohio’s RttT commitment to provide great teachers and great leaders for all Ohio schools Designed to improve teacher retention, enhance teacher quality and effectiveness, result in improved student achievement Will serve as many as 20,000 Resident Educators across nearly 1,000 traditional and community school LEAs
  • 5. Overview of the OhioResident EducatorProgram
  • 6. Resident Educator License 2009: New licensure system 2011: First Resident Educator licenses issuedOhio Resident Educator Program 2009-2010 and 2010-2011: Transition from Entry Year Program to Resident Educator Program 2011-2012: Ohio Resident Educator Program begins
  • 7.  Teaching and Learning Cycle State Mentor Training Formative Assessment Monitor and Document REs’ Progress Summative, Performance-based Assessment
  • 8. In Year 1, RE:  Communicates with mentor and principal  Uses formative assessment activities to collect evidence, advance practice  Uses state-designed formative assessment tools  Documents instructional meetings with mentor  Maintains a collection of evidence/documents to inform summative assessmentIn Year 2, RE:  Continues processes, protocols, and tools from Year 1  Utilizes differentiated support and resources to move toward meeting Year 2 goals  Completes Year 2 Formative Progress Review
  • 9. In Year 3, RE:  Prepares for summative assessment  Completes summative assessmentIn Year 4, RE:  Participates in PD and leadership activities  Re-takes deficient portions of summative assessment  Completes RE Program requirements and applies for 5-year professional license
  • 10. The LEA:  Provides district/school orientation  Determines eligibility and registers REs  Selects, assigns, and supports mentors  Provides time and support for mentor training  Provides support and PD for REs and mentorsThe Principal:  Works with PC to select/assign mentors  Ensures mentors attend state training  Provides time for mentor-RE collaboration  Provides opportunities for reciprocal observations  Collaborates with mentor and RE to align RE goals
  • 11. The Mentor:  Attends all required training for certification  Communicates with RE and building administrator  Respects confidential relationship with RE and principal  Supports RE through use of formative assessment processes, protocols, and tools  Collaborates with the PC to complete end-of-year Formative Progress Review
  • 12. Evaluation Design and Plan
  • 13. The four primary evaluation foci include: Implementation fidelity and compliance Implementation quality and effectiveness Implementation influence and impact Implementation scale-up and sustainability
  • 14.  Objective 1 - State’s Role in the RE Program Objective 2 - LEA Implementation of the RE Program Objective 3 - Impact of the RE Program on Resident Educators Objective 4 - Impact of the RE Program on Resident Educator Mentors Objective 5 - Impact of the RE Program on LEA Administrators, Policies and Procedures Objective 6 - Full Implementation of the RE Program ◦ Part 1: Implementation and Reporting of RE Summative Assessment ◦ Part 2: Resource Analysis for Sustainability of Full Implementation
  • 15. Evaluation Focus Overarching Evaluation QuestionsImplementation To what extent did To what extent did To what extent didFidelity and the State develop LEAs implement a REs, RE mentors,Compliance an infrastructure local REP aligned and principals and provide with the State utilize guidance support to facilitate REP? and materials LEAs in Objective 2 provided by the implementing local State REP and/or REP with fidelity to the LEA REP? the State REP? Objective 3, 4, 5 Objective 1, 6
  • 16. Evaluation Focus Overarching Evaluation QuestionsImplementation To what extent To what extent do To what extent doQuality and does the State’s LEAs meet the REs, RE mentors,Effectiveness implementation of State’s quality and principals the REP meet its standards for local perceive that the own and external REP LEA REP has quality standards? implementation? been implemented Objective 1, 6 Objective 1, 2 effectively and with quality? Objective 1, 2
  • 17. Evaluation Focus Overarching Evaluation QuestionsImplementation What is the nature What is the nature What is the natureInfluence and and extent of the and extent of and extent ofImpact State REP influence of the impact of the LEA contribution to LEA REP on local REP on REs, RE State RttT goals policy, procedures, mentors, and regarding educator and practices principals? What effectiveness? regarding support are the anticipated What are the for REs? What are and unanticipated anticipated and the anticipated outcomes of unanticipated and unanticipated implementation? outcomes of outcomes of Objective 3, 4, 5 implementation? implementation? Objective 1, 6 Objective 2, 5
  • 18. Evaluation Focus Overarching Evaluation QuestionsImplementation What are the What are the What are theScale-up and benefits and trade- benefits and trade- benefits and trade-Sustainability offs for the State offs for the LEA of offs for the REs, of sustaining the sustaining the LEA RE mentors, and State REP in its REP in its current principals of current form? form? sustaining the LEA Objective 6 Objective 2, 6 REP in its current form? Objective 3, 4, 5, 6
  • 19.  Concurrent nested, mixed-methods design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007) Case study methodology (Merriam, 1998) Collective case study (Stake, 2000) of 30 LEAs across Ohio Typical case and stratified purposeful sampling (Patton, 2002) Triangulation model with data transformation (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007) Collection/analysis of survey data
  • 20. State Level LEA Level Educator LevelKey ODE RE Program Staff LEA RE Program Resident EducatorsInformants RE Program State TrainersCoordinator RE Mentors LEA Superintendent/ LEA Administrators DesigneeData State REP documents NTC Surveys NTC SurveysSources State REP tools LEA Annual Reports Building REP documents State REP communications LEA REP documents Building REP Observations of training LEA REP communications Interviews communications Focus Groups Teacher induction Interviews Interviews documents from other RE Questionnaire states
  • 21. # of REs in all # of REs in all # of RE # of # of LEAs to Average # of case study case study Mentors in all Administrator Size of LEA be selected as REs per year LEAs LEAs case study s in all case cases in each LEA 2012-13 2013-14 LEAs study LEAsSmall – rural 10 to 12 3 60 to 72 90 to 108 10 to 24 10 to 36 and small town Medium – 5 to 6 8 80 to 96 120 to 144 10 to 42 10 to 42 small urbanand suburbanLarge – large 5 to 6 15 150 to 180 225 to 270 15 to 36 10 to 60 urban and suburban Joint 1 to 2 5 10 to 20 15 to 30 1 to 2 1 to 2 Vocational LEACommunity 4 to 7 3 24 to 42 36 to 63 4 to 21 4 to 21Schools LEA Total 25 to 33 162 to 205 324 to 410 486 to 615 40 to 125 35 to 161
  • 22. Resident EducatorProgram Year 1 andBeyond
  • 23.  Total Number of REs = 4,206 Number of Active RE Mentors = 2,975 Number of LEAs implementing REP = 860
  • 24. Resident Educators Other eCommunity 7% 3% throughout Private Ohio 12%Community Traditional 17% 61% Traditional 2,558 Community 729 Private 500 Other 311 eCommunity 108 Total 4,206
  • 25.  Local Education Agencies with Resident Educators Traditional District LEAs 454 Community School LEAs 227 Private/Parochial LEAs 84 Other LEAs (≈ESCs, CTCs) 95 Identified Resident Educator Mentors Type # Mentors REs/Mentor Traditional District LEAs 1,979 1.29 Community School LEAs 363 2.26 Private/Parochial LEAs 363 1.34 Other LEAs (≈ESCs, 270 1.15 CTCs) Total 2,975 1.40
  • 26. Examples of Teacher Turnover Rates◦ Traditional District LEAs  Large Urban/Low SES 11 RE / 3,187 FTE ≈ 0.03%  Rural/Moderate SES 13 RE / 457 FTE ≈ 2.8%  Rural/Low SES 3 RE / 20 FTE ≈ 15.0%◦ Community School LEAs  Large Urban Magnet School 3 RE / 42 FTE ≈ 7.1%  Large Urban High School 11 RE / 40 FTE ≈ 27.5%  Large Urban Credit Recovery 8 RE / 11 FTE ≈ 72.7%
  • 27.  By Fall 2012, two cohorts of REs (approximately 8,000) will be teaching in Ohio schools In 2011-2012 more than 4,000 RE mentors were trained and nearly 3,000 mentored REs. On average, each mentor worked with 1 or 2 REs. More mentor trainings will take place in Summer 2012. REs are widely and unequally distributed. More than half of Ohio’s districts are small rural districts. Over 25,000 teachers teach in moderate to large urban schools, while nearly 30,000 teach in suburban schools.
  • 28. Changing the Landscape ofTeaching in Ohio
  • 29. How does the RE Program intersect with: Student Growth Measures (Value-Added) Ohio Teacher Evaluation System Ohio Principal Evaluation System Teacher Incentive Program TeachOhio Other? Focus on Teacher Effectiveness as the Key to Improve Student Achievement
  • 30.  How should Ohio operationalize teacher effectiveness? What might be appropriate indicators of teacher effectiveness? How might implementation of the Resident Educator Program in districts change the culture of teacher professional development and learning for all teachers? What organizational, structural, or policy changes might be necessary to support and sustain such a change in culture?
  • 31.  Dr. Sarah Woodruff  Dr. Marsha Lewis woodrusb@muohio.edu lewism5@ohio.edu 513.529.1686 740.593.1435 Dr. Debbie Zorn  Dr. Holly Raffle zorndl@ucmail.uc.edu raffle@ohio.edu 513.556.3818 740.597.1710