|
Do You Really Know What You're Using?
A Comparison of Two Widely Used Science and Math Observation Instruments
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Martha Henry,
M A Henry Consulting LLC,
mahenry@mahenryconsulting.com
|
| Keith Murray,
M A Henry Consulting LLC,
keithsmurray@mahenryconsulting.com
|
| Abstract:
Observation of classroom lessons is an important if problematic component of educational evaluation. Where programs aim at teacher professional development, student performance enhancement, curricular change, or implementation of reform teaching methods, direct observation is crucial to validating and explaining results. However, the challenges of funding and maintaining uniformly trained observers and optimally timing observations have led some evaluators to avoid this evaluative technique. Of greatest importance is the selection of an observational instrument that captures information across domains of interest with sufficient validity and reliability. This presentation offers an analysis and comparison of the two most often used observational instruments in math and science K-12 classrooms. These instruments – Inside the Classroom Observation and Analytic Protocol and the Reform Teaching Observation Protocol – evidence not only similarities but marked differences in design, focus, documentation and observer skill requirements. The authors offer recommendations for potential users to enhance usefulness and avoid pitfalls.
|
|
The Impact of Benchmark Assessments Aligned to State Standards on Student Achievement
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Susan Henderson,
WestEd,
shender@wested.org
|
| Sarah Guckenburg,
Learning Innovations at WestEd,
sgucken@wested.org
|
| Anthony Petrosino,
WestEd,
apetros@wested.org
|
| Steve Hamilton,
WestEd,
|
| Abstract:
This study examines whether districts using quarterly benchmark exams in middle school mathematics show greater gains in student achievement than those not employing this practice. The study will examine differences in student achievement as measured by the Massachusetts State Comprehensive Assessment (MCAS) in schools using quarterly benchmark assessments aligned with Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks Standards for mathematics in grades 6 and 8. This study offers practical insight to evaluators in conducting scientifically based evaluations of educational programs through a quasi-experimental design that does not require randomization to treatment group prior to the implementation of an educational innovation. The results of this study have the potential to provide a solid research base to inform district and school level practices in the use of formative and benchmark assessment to increase student achievement on state education standards.
|
|
Layered Learning: Evaluating a Constructivist Mathematics Approach in the Accountability Era
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Jennifer Coyne Cassata,
Prince William County Public Schools,
cassatjc@pwcs.edu
|
| Abstract:
Program evaluations conducted in schools involve multiple layers of learning. The proposed paper will describe an evaluation of a constructivist approach to mathematics adopted by a relatively large school district. Internal program evaluators were asked to conduct an evaluation of the program's implementation and impact, beginning with the first phase of implementation (grades K-2). From the outset, the evaluation process generated learning about some teachers' and administrators' reservations about this mathematics approach, as well as about concerns over appropriate ways to measure student learning. The paper will discuss the learning that occurred during the evaluation process, including: 1) learning by evaluators about the program and about the district's evaluation capacity, 2) learning by stakeholders about the program, the evaluation process, and the nature of teaching and learning, and 3) student learning. The paper will also consider the fear of learning from evaluation that can occur in the atmosphere of accountability.
|
| | |