Get documents about "FS-NYCETP
Document Sample
FS-NYCETP
Follow-up Study of the
New York Collaborative for
Excellence in Teacher
Preparation
Dr. Bert Flugman, Principal Investigator
Dr. Barbara Schroder, Project Director
Center for Advanced Study in Education, CUNY Graduate Center
Dr. Serigne Gningue, Lehman College Director
Background
The New York Collaborative for
Excellence in Teacher Preparation (NY-
CETP) took place at 6 New York City
colleges between 1996 and 2000. Its
major accomplishment was the re-design
of 30 math and science courses for
undergraduate education majors,
following NSF principles of reform.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 2
Goals
FS-NYCETP was funded by NSF beginning in
August, 2001, to examine the impact of NY-
CETP at 3 of the 6 original colleges (Brooklyn
College, Lehman College, and City College, all
part of the City University of New York system).
Its umbrella research question is:
How are our undergraduate
elementary education graduates
doing teaching math and science?
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 3
Sub-questions are:
How does participation in CETP courses affect
attitudes, knowledge, and classroom
performance of preservice teachers during
college and first year of teaching?
How can new modes of teacher training narrow
the performance gap among students with
different levels of prior academic achievement?
How do new approaches to teacher training
(CETP) hold up to the pressures of urban school
environments?
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 4
The Colleges
All are senior colleges of the City
University of New York, and prepare
teachers to teach in New York City public
schools.
Their undergraduate education students
are predominantly urban, african-
american, and latino. They are older
(most between 26 – 40 years old), and
40% are immigrants.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 5
Study Cohorts
College A:
Undergraduate elementary education majors who
were “rising student teachers” in AY 2001. All had
taken between 2 and 9 CETP math, science and
education classes.
Teaching Fellows (comparison group); baccalaureate
degree holders following an “alternate route” to
certification -- have taken no CETP classes.
College B:
Undergraduate elementary education majors who
were “rising student teachers.” Had taken between 1
and 4 CETP classes in math and science.
College C:
Undergraduate elementary education minors who
were “rising student teachers.” Had taken between 0
and 2 CETP classes in science or science education.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 6
Data Collection Activities,
2002-2003
Core College Student Surveys (for 3rd
year), to approximately 550 students in
26 CETP’ed classes.
Core Faculty Surveys to apprx. 45
teachers and administrators involved
with CETP reform.
Projected Teaching Strategies Survey,
accompanying college student surveys,
to approximately 500 Education Majors.
(2nd year)
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 7
Data collection activities, 2002-
2003, cont.
Maintained CUNY student records
database on 298 student teachers and
97 teaching fellows. (“CETP study
cohort”).
Observed 52 student teachers and 15
Teaching Fellows of above cohort using
CETP’s Classroom Observation Protocol.
Observees and the principals of their
schools completed surveys.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 8
Data collection activities,
2003-2004
Follow student teachers (and Teaching
Fellows) into their first full year in the
classroom, repeating observations and
surveys, and collecting lesson plan and
assessment samples.
Student achievement data - math and
science city and state test scores - will
be collected for their classes.
Survey principals of observees’ schools.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 9
Study Population N’s
College A College B College C Total
CUNY student cohorts:
for student 360 320 120 800
surveys
for student
records analysis 84 90 103 277
for classroom
observations and
teacher surveys
AY 2002-3 24 12 16 67
AY 2003-4 28 2 5 35
(projected)
Principals surveyed:
AY 2002-3 12 8 5 31
AY 2003-4 18 2 5 25
(projected)
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 10
Overall Findings to Date
86% of education students intended to
use reform strategies regularly, when
asked before they began their own
teaching. (Average score of 30 or above on
“Reform strategy scale”)
The most popular strategies were:
“students have enough time to learn what is
required”, “…work on problems related to
the real world” and “…assessment results
are used to modify instruction.”
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 11
Overall Findings to Date, cont.
Only 46% of observed student
teachers and teaching fellows
reported using these reform
strategies regularly. (Average score
of 30 or above on “Reform strategy
scale”)
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 12
Overall Findings to Date, cont.
COP Ratings, 2002-03
Description Count %
1 Passive “learning” 2 3
2 Activity for activity’s sake 3 4
3 Elements of effective instruction 10 15
4 Beginning stages of effective instruction: 20 30
low
5 Beginning stages of effective instruction: 10 15
solid
6 Beginning stages of effective instruction: 5 8
high
7 Accomplished, effective instruction 15 22
8 Exemplary instruction 2 3
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 13
Findings to Date, cont.
The average capsule rating on the
COP was 4.8. (on a scale ranging from 1
“ineffective instruction” to 8 “exemplary
instruction”)
52 observees, or 78%, scored at
least at the “Beginning Stage of
Effective Instruction.”
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 14
Towards analyzing results:
Observees (67) by number of
CETP classes.
# of College College College
CETP A B C
classes
TF (0) 15 0 0
Low (0-1) 1 3 16
Medium 8 9 0
(2-4)
High 21 0 0
(5-9)
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 15
2002-3 Observees: COP Capsule
Ratings by number of CETP
classes
Capsule TF Low Medium High
Rating (0) (0,1) (2-4) (5–9)
5 4 3 3
1-2 33% 21% 25% 14%
10 15 9 18
3-5 67% 79% 75% 86%
Total 15 19 12 21
100% 100% 100% 100%
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 16
Observing Lehman College’s Teacher
Candidates: Common Trends
I. Context
At Lehman College, a Teacher
Candidate (TC) may obtain New
York State Initial Certification in two
ways:
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 17
The TC may be an undergraduate
student. All undergraduate TCs at
Lehman College have a liberal arts
or sciences major. To be certified,
they have to complete a 4course
minor program followed by a
Methods’ Course and Student
Teaching for a total of 23-26
credits.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 18
Such program integrates
practice with theory. All courses
include as a central component,
field-based experiences at
schools and community
agencies (100 hours must be
completed before student teaching).
CETP students fall under this
category.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 19
The TC may be a graduate student in
education in Secondary Education
(Math, Science, Social Studies, etc…), in
Elementary Education, or in Special
Education, who:
May be already holding a teaching certificate
(Provisional or Initial) and is seeking a
Master's degree which will lead him/her to
Permanent or Professional certification.
His/her program of studies is mostly content-
based and does not require Student
Teaching or Internship.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 20
May be holding some type of temporary
certificate, is teaching, and is seeking
Initial certification. His/her program
requires Internship.
FELLOWS and TOPS, who hold a
Transitional B certificate, fall under
this category (They are mentored for 2-3
years through monthly observations).
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 21
May not hold any type of
certificate, is not teaching, and is
seeking Initial certification. His/her
program requires Student
Teaching.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 22
Student teachers and Interns are
observed at least four times during the
semester. They also attend bi-weekly
seminars.
I am involved in:
the supervision of student teachers and
interns in Secondary Education,
the mentoring of TOPS/FELLOWS, and
the observations of CETP students.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 23
What follows represents a summary of
what I have observed and tried to address
after my first observation.
TCs are evaluated in each of five
competencies:
Classroom Management,
Instruction Planning,
Instruction Delivery,
Assessment, and
Human Relations/Communication Skills.
(The tool was adapted from assessment developed by Towson University
and Baltimore County Schools)
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 24
II. Observational Findings
The COP measurement instrument
focuses more on Instruction Planning
and on Instruction Delivery than on the
other competencies. Nevertheless, once
in the classroom, one cannot ignore the
other four competencies.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 25
Management The TC is expected to:
Display an understanding and implement
components necessary of effective
classroom management (high expectations for
student success and consistency in dealing with
students)
Establish standards of conduct that are clear
to all students.
Respond to behavior in an appropriate and
consistent manner
Establish routines that are evident and
maximize instructional time.
Interact with students in a caring and
respectful manner.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 26
Management General Findings:
CETP TCs seem to have less management
problems. Is it because students are still young?
In many CETP classes: students that cause
problems are usually isolated in a corner and
given a task so that they won't disturb.
Most TCs ignore some students' misbehavior and
work habits: some students do other things
without the teacher’s awareness: reading a book,
drawing, copying some other work, throwing
papers, spit balls, etc…
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 27
Management General Findings:
cont’d.
The rate of misbehavior seems to increase as the
grade level increases, and attains its climax in
middle school classes.
HS students care more about grades being
reduced because of conduct than MS students.
MS students care more about some types of
punishment: Lunch, Gym, or after-school
Detention (if the school allows such policies) or
not going on a trip.
I often advise teachers to establish some type of
mechanism to address students' inappropriate
behavior, depending on the level.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 28
Instruction Planning The TC is expected to:
Select appropriate curricular standards and
outcomes based on formal and informal
student assessment
Write an effective lesson plan
Plan meaningful performance tasks
appropriate to the linguistic, cultural, and
developmental levels of the students.
Plan collaboratively with the cooperating
teacher and other classroom instructional
support personnel.
Develop a long-range unit plan.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 29
Instruction Planning General Findings
The plans written usually look great on paper
because most TCs:
list all the required components
spend a lot of times designing them.
However, TCs tend to:
link the lessons to too many standards
list too many objectives, and consequently
write lesson plans that are too long. How many
Science or Mathematics ideas can one teach in
one period?
More cognitive tasks are seen in CETP
classes than in MS or HS classes. However,
students rarely reach Cognitive Level 3
(Knowledge Representation).
HS teachers, for the most part, still teach
traditionally.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 30
Instructional Delivery The TC is expected to:
Effectively implement the lesson plan and
demonstrate mastery of content
Use a variety of instructional strategies and
groupings appropriate to instructional goals
Ask questions which require the use of
higher level thinking skills and use sufficient
wait time
Provide all learners with opportunities to
participate.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 31
Instructional Delivery Findings
Time management is usually a big issue.
TCs are often easily distracted by
students' behavior, and by some students’
questions that deviate from the topic.
Sometimes, the TC realizes that students
do not have a prior knowledge on a
concept and wants to review it right there
before moving on. He/she consequently
often runs out of time.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 32
Instructional Delivery Findings
Even though students are put in groups, the
TC ends up doing all the talking (This was
noticed even in classes that use IMP).
The TC does not really control what goes on
in every group; disruptive behavior by one
member leads to disruption in the group,
which usually goes unnoticed. The TC is
often near the blackboard and seldom
moves around to see what students are
doing.
*IMP is a standard-based program.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 33
Instructional Delivery Findings
TCs have the most urgent need in questioning
techniques:
How they question and the type of questions asked
often confuse students even for the simplest ideas.
One question can be repeated three to four times in
a different way before they call on someone to
respond.
They rarely validate students’ responses properly
(Always in a hurry to move to another question)
Rarely ask students to make conjectures.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 34
Instructional Delivery Findings
Very often, TCs unconsciously turn to
students who tend to raise their hands and
already know the answers.
Rarely do they call on someone who is just
sitting and doing his/her work, or not
participating.
Rarely send students to the board.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 35
Assessment The TC is expected to:
Employ a variety of assessment approaches,
which match instructional goals.
Have established and clearly communicated
assessment criteria to students.
Provide assessment feedback to students
that is accurate and relevant.
Use self-assessment to evaluate and improve
instruction
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 36
Assessment Findings
The following conversation usually goes on after
the observation
How do you think the lesson went?
• TC: I think it went pretty well. They all understand
what was taught.
Did all students understand the concept?
• TC: May be not all but most of them did.
Can you list me a few students that you thought did
well?
• Well Eric and maybe Barbara...(The doubt starts to set
in).
Are you sure that most students who were
engaged in their task understood it?
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 37
Assessment Findings
That's usually how we start discussing
different ways of assessing students in
class during the lesson.
For many TCs, it’s only through the tests
given that they really assess students’
learning and understanding of the
concepts taught.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 38
Assessment Findings
As a mean of self-assessment, TC has to also
submit a self-evaluation using the Division-
wide Internship/Student Teacher Assessment
tool.
Throughout the Internship/Student Teaching
experience, TCs also keep a daily journal,
emailed weekly to the supervisor, to reflect on
their practices and on school issues.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 39
Human Relations/Communications Skills
The teacher is expected to:
Practice effective human relations/communication
skills with colleagues, parents, and children.
Demonstrate exemplary professional behavior.
Maintain a positive relationship with all students and
show flexibility towards individual student’s needs.
Speak and use a clear and accurate language.
Practice effective human relations/communication
skills through a supportive/cooperative relationship
with colleagues.
Demonstrate professional behavior.
Model respect for diversity within the school
community.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 40
Human Relations/Communications Skills
Findings
We deal with a large number of
teachers that speak a language
other than English. However, lesson
plans are well written and students
usually have no problems
understanding what they say.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 41
Human Relations/Communications Skills
Findings
Emphasis is on attendance, punctuality, school
dress code, preparedness, awareness of
school issues etc…
Relationships with colleagues are usually
cordial.
Except for one CETP student who did not get
along with her cooperating teacher because of
the way the cooperating teacher handled
students who were giving her a difficult time.
We ended up changing the TC placement.
Otherwise, CETPs are usually well liked by
students.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 42
III. Conclusions
CETPs,TOPS, and FELLOWS all agree that
good classroom management is the key to
teaching.
For TCs, what they learn in classes and
through fieldwork observations do not match
what they learn when they start teaching.
TCs are usually better during my second
observation. I try to observe them teach the
same class to see if the strategies we draw
together work.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 43
Conclusions Cont’d
Follow-up conferences and observations
are essential to teacher training.
Support mechanism has to be in place
from the first month (if not the first week)
of school to help new teachers.
Assessing students in one observation
alone (as done using the COP for CETP)
is not sufficient.
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 44
What other data do we have?
Undergrad background:
College grades, courses, overall gpas,
math and science courses and cums, etc.
New York State teaching license exam
results: LAST
School context variables:
Principal survey responses
Teacher survey responses
Observers comments
COPs: activities, student engagement,
cognitive levels, etc.
Lesson plans and assessment plans
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 45
What should we focus
on?
Which of these variables
are most interesting to
you, and why?
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 46
What happened to last year’s
observees? (n=67)
N %
Didn’t graduate yet 7 10
Graduated, no response 10 15
“ not teaching at all 9 13
“ moved 1 1
“ teaching, but not Gr.1-6, 6 9
math or science
“, being observed 30 45
“, declined (no reason) 4 6
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 47
How are other schools
of education tracking
and evaluating the
performance of their
graduates?
Follow-up Study of the New York Collaborative for Teacher Excellence 48
Related docs
Other docs by yyc62487
