Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Assessing Teaching Behaviors:
Introduction to an Assessment Instrument
for Teacher Candidates and Reflection of Teaching Behaviors
(A professional development workshop for cooperating teachers.) Workshop Outline (Note that all the information will be viewed on PowerPoint and there will be handouts with the slides for the participants to take notes. This PowerPoint will be available on the Office of Partnerships website following the workshop.)
1. Introduction (10 minutes) a. Welcome b. Introduction of facilitators c. Criteria for Cooperating Teachers-Info d. Purpose and goals of the workshop e. Point participants to blank papers/cards on their tables. They can write questions
that arise during the session. f. Overview of leaning objectives g. K-W-L (K-brainstorm what participants know abut assessment of teaching
behaviors, W-what participants want to know (and then the L-what participants learned at the end of the workshop about assessing teaching behaviors)
2. Short background of the need for assessment and how the Feinstein School of Education and Human Development (FSEHD) developed the assessment form (15 minutes)
a. Conceptual framework of PAR (Planning-Action-Reflecting) b. How the RIPTS are aligned with the assessment instrument c. The assessment instrument-dissecting and examining the sections
i. Section One: Lesson Indicators 1. Planning (Planning Indicators, Implementation Indicators) 2. Action (Implementation Indicators, Content Indicators, Climate
Indicators, Classroom Management Indicators) ii. Section Two: Capsule Rating of Observed Lesson
iii. Section Three: Post Observation iv. Section Four: Ongoing Progress (Personal Behavior Indicators,
Technology Indicators)
3. Scoring Criteria (30 minutes) a. Statistics 101 assessment vocabulary
i. Introduction to some assessment terms: analytic holistic scoring, criterion versus norm referenced scoring, performance level rubric, scoring criteria, indicators, normative versus developmental
4/26/2011
1
ASSESSING TEACHING BEHAVIORS:
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP
FOR ALL RIC COOPERATING TEACHERS
INTRODUCTION TO AN ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT FOR
TEACHER CANDIDATES AND REFLECTION
OF TEACHING BEHAVIORS
NOVEMBER 19, 2009 & DECEMBER 8th, 2009
JANUARY 28TH & FEBRUARY 2nd, 2010
WELCOMEFIRST……•Thank you for being here•Thank you for being here•Thank you for working with our RIC teacher candidates•Thank you for your passion for professional development and to improve•Delighted to welcome you•This is the first in a series of workshops for you (next one‐Teacher Candidate Work Sample‐replaces for you (next one Teacher Candidate Work Sample replaces Exit Portfolio and then technology?)•RIPITS workshop is also required of all CT’s!•Do communicate with the OPP about your needs
4/26/2011
2
“HOUSEKEEPING NOTES” Restrooms
Sign in at the attendance table
Make a name tag
Clearly sign roster, including all present and former names, need certification # as well (not Social Security #) and/or birthday/date.
Be sure your EMAIL is correct too!
Credit reports (CEU’s) will be issued at close of workshop (Sign out at the same table where you registered.)
RIC submits names to RIDE
INTRODUCTIONS
OUR FACILITATORS TODAY:
SUSAN GRACIASUSAN GRACIA
EILEEN C. SULLIVAN
And…
MEMBERS OF THE FSEHD MEMBERS OF THE FSEHD ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE
4/26/2011
3
CRITERIA FOR COOPERATING TEACHERS Possess a continuing contract
Possess a professional teaching certificate for the grade level or special subject in which the student teacher is assigned
Have taught a minimum of three full years as a certified teacher
Have taught at least one full year at the current assignment
Agree to accept no more than one full semester or two half semester student teachers per academic year (Special note‐full semesters for elementary ed)
Attend Rhode Island College, RIDE, or School Department sponsored Rhode Island Professional Teaching Standards training sessions (as as specified in the partnership agreement between your school department and Rhode Island College.
Make a commitment to develop their teaching in line with the Feinstein School’s Conceptual Framework and the Rhode Island Professional Teaching Standards
Demonstrate teaching excellence as determined by the School Department
Complete a minimum of three formal evaluations of your student teacher using the observation forms supplied by the OSPFP At least one of these
REQUIREMENTS FOR OUR RIC COOPERATING TEACHERS
forms supplied by the OSPFP. At least one of these observations must be completed in conjunction with the college supervisor.
Complete and submit the final evaluation forms
Participate in the evaluation of your student teacher’s Teacher Candidate Work Sample (previously Exit Portfolio) according to the (previously Exit Portfolio) according to the guidelines set forth by student teacher’s teacher preparation program
Electronic submission‐TBD
4/26/2011
4
GETTING TOGETTING TOKNOW YOUKNOW YOU
THAT’S ME!
THAT’S ME!THAT’S ME!•Elementary education teachers?•Middle school?•High school?•Mentored a RIC student teacher before? Fall? Spring?•Eager to work with one of our students?Taken RIPTS training?•Used the new Teacher Candidate Observation and Progress Report this Observation and Progress Report this semester? Survey Monkey?•Positive experience?•How many from each district?•Any college supervisors?•Eager to learn about the instrument?
4/26/2011
5
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
To introduce you to an assessment instrument, which analyzes teaching behaviors and documents the growth gof these behaviors
To examine the scoring criteria and the six‐point rubric of the defined assessment instrument
To teach you to use an assessment To teach you to use an assessment instrument with teacher candidates
LEARNING OBJECTIVES (Continued) To be exposed to the proper terminology of scoring
To discuss teaching behaviors, using the defined assessment rubric in large and defined assessment rubric, in large and then small groups
To analyze a teaching video with respect to Implementation, Climate, and Classroom Management (sections of the assessment instrument)assessment instrument)
To reflect on how this instrument can assist you with working with student teachers and your own reflective teaching practices
4/26/2011
6
GRAPHIC ORGANIZERGRAPHIC ORGANIZERKK‐‐WW‐‐LL
What do I Know?
What do I need to and Want to learn?
What have I Learned?
KNOWWhat do you KNOW about teacher evaluation, assessment of teaching behaviors, and the use of instruments ,to assess teaching?
EVERY TABLE RESPONDS!
WANT TO LEARN
Will use the learning objectives
for the workshop
4/26/2011
7
AGENDA
I. Short background on the need for a new assessment instrument, the Teacher Candidate Observation and Progress Report for Student Teaching
II. Scoring criteria
III. Scoring practice
IV. Making connections with the instrument
V. Wrap up and the L (what have I learned) of graphic organizer, evaluations, CEU’s issued
I. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND ON THE INSTRUMENT
Created in response to faculty concerns and desire to gather and use more meaningful data
Designed in collaboration with FSEHD faculty, with multiple opportunities for feedback
Piloted in Spring 2009
Drawn from models used nationally
Represents first time observation data are being used in our unit assessment system
4/26/2011
8
FIRST‐LET’S EXAMINE THE OPR Let’s examine the OPR (see handout of the report)
Front page sign‐off documents the three visits and submitted at end of experience (all sign)
Other pages‐note organization and rating scale at topOther pages note organization and rating scale at top Section One: Lesson Indicators Planning, Action) Section Two: Capsule Rating of Observed Lesson Section Three: Post Observation Section Four: Ongoing Progress (completed by
Cooperating Teacher only)
Implemented three times during student teaching experience ( t b l t d t th )(one must be completed together)
These three reports document the student teaching experience
Submission of the OPR (TBD for spring 2009) Electronically? (Fall 2010 will be Chalk and Wire)
TEACHER CANDIDATE OBSERVATION AND PROGRESS REPORT (OPR)
Designed to demonstrate candidate growth!
Organized around Conceptual Framework—Planning, Action, Reflection
Aligned with RIPTSg
Observation indicators (completed by CT and CS) related to: Planning Action: implementation, content, climate, classroom
management Reflection Overall Capsule Rating
Includes goals for next observation
Progress indicators (completed by CT) related to: Professional behavior Use of technology Available technical resources
4/26/2011
9
ASSESSMENT VOCABULARY (SEE PACKET)
Analytic scoring
Assessment
Competency‐based (criterion‐referenced assessment)
Criteria
Criteria referenced (competency‐based assessment)
Holistic scoring
Implicit scoring
Indicators
Inter‐rater reliability
Norm‐referenced assessment
Outcomes
Performance level
Rating scales
Rubrics
4/26/2011
10
SCORING AND THE OPR:
Includes multiple, observable indicators to: k li it h t i b i g make explicit what is being assessed reduce the need for the assessor to write many, repetitive, general comments
Yields granular information about multiple dimensions of a performance
4/26/2011
11
•7 point scale is designed to detect wide variation in performance by offering 7 possible ratings—and to show growth
SCORING CRITERIA
•Accommodates faculty’s frequent requests for “wider” scale (e.g., +, .5 ratings)
Think of 0, 1, 3, and 5 as the base ratings for unacceptable, developing, acceptable, and target.
R ti f d 6 t i t th t it Ratings of 2, 4, and 6 account give raters the opportunity to describe performance that is a little higher than basic performance for that performance level – the equivalent of a + or .5 on old rubrics
III. SCORING PRACTICE Watch the video clip
Rate instruction on the Implementation, Climate, and Classroom Management indicators (see blue handout)
Discuss your scores with people at your table
Make sure you discuss these indicators:
Implementation: Indicator 2
Climate: Indicator 7
Classroom Management: Indicator 3 Classroom Management: Indicator 3
Keep note of factors that make it easy and/or challenging to evaluate the instruction you viewed
4/26/2011
12
TEACHER VIDEO ANALYSIS
TIME TO STRETCH
ACTIVE LEARNING
SIMPLE CONTRALATERAL &
CROSSING‐THE‐MIDLINE ACTIVITIES
CROSS OVERS & ELBOW TO KNEE
APPLE PICKING
4/26/2011
13
“I hear and I forget.
d bI see and I remember.
I do and I understand.”
(Chinese Proverb)(Chinese Proverb)
Large GroupDiscussion Questions
What are some factors that made it easy yto evaluate this sample of instruction?
What are some factors that made it challenging to score this sample of instruction?
How do the teaching behaviors in the video relate/compare to those in your discipline?
4/26/2011
14
FSEHD ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE
CONSENSUS RATINGS
Seven faculty members, watched the entire video and then used the OPR to rate the teacher and then used the OPR to rate the teacher
Used Survey Monkey
Then a 4‐hour discussion to determine the ratings on the blue sheet
Read through our ratings and commentary
Discussion/Reaction
ACTION‐IMPLEMENTATION INDICATOR 2.
COMMITTEE SCORE=3
The teacher candidate attends to individual student needs, including learning and , g gbehavioral issues.
Score of 3 because the teacher circulates around the room, answers questions as they arise (from some students), and seems to meet the needs of most students Because meet the needs of most students. Because he only interacts with some students, it is not clear that the needs of all students are attended to.
4/26/2011
15
ACTION‐CLIMATE INDICATOR 7.
COMMITTEE SCORE=3
There was a high proportion of student‐to‐student i i b h f h lcommunication about the content of the lesson.
Score of 3 because there was a good amount of student‐to student communication in the lesson. However, the teacher did a lot of talking, and it was a o , o o g,very didactic lesson. Additionally, there were some students who were not engaged and were not working or communicating with other students.
CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT‐ INDICATOR 3.
COMMITTEE SCORE=4
The majority of class time is spent devoted to j y pacademic tasks, and time is divided in a meaningful, constructive way.
Score of 4 because the majority of class time is devoted to academic tasks. However, time is not always divided in a meaningful, constructive way, as the teacher tends to tell students the answers without allowing them to construct their own meaning.
4/26/2011
16
IF TIME ALLOWS: ACTION‐IMPLEMENTATION
INDICATOR 7. COMMITTEE SCORE=1
The teacher candidate’s questioning strategies are lik l t h th d l t f t d t likely to enhance the development of student conceptual understanding/problem solving (e.g., emphasized higher order questions, appropriately used “wait time,” identified prior conceptions and misconceptions).
Score of 1 because the teacher frequently asks multiple questions, does not wait for answers, rephrases his own questions a number of times, and then answers his own questions for the students.
IV. MAKING CONNECTIONS WITH THE OPR
Use of the OPR as a reflective practice of your own teaching
Could you use it to evaluate a lesson you teach? What Could you use it to evaluate a lesson you teach? What would the ratings tell you?
10 minutes to take time to select one indicator representing one of your strengths as a teacher and one where you would like to improve
• SEE HANDOUT
4/26/2011
17
IV. MAKING CONNECTIONS WITH THE INSTRUMENT
V. WRAP UP The L (what have I learned) of graphic organizer
Workshop evaluation (bring it with you to Workshop evaluation (bring it with you to drop off as you leave)
CEU’s distributed at the entrance area as you leave
See you at the next workshop on the Teacher Candidate Work Sample then we’ll be p
teaching you about Chalk & Wire
Assessment Vocabulary
Analytic scoring: Evaluating candidate work across multiple dimensions of performance
rather than from an overall impression (holistic scoring). In analytic
scoring, individual scores for each dimension are scored and
reported. For example, analytic scoring of the Observation and
Progress Report include scores on multiple indicators of each RIPTS
standard, rather than an overall impression of candidate performance
on each standard.
Assessment Any systematic method of obtaining information from tests and other
sources, used to draw inferences about characteristics of people,
objects, or programs; the process of gathering, describing, or
quantifying information about performance; an exercise-such as a
written test, portfolio, or demonstration-that seeks to measure a
candidate's skills or knowledge in a subject area.
Competency-
based assessment
(criterion-
referenced
assessment)
Measures an individual's performance against a predetermined
standard of acceptable performance. Progress is based on actual
performance rather than on how well learners perform in comparison
to others or how they might be expected to perform at a given time
point. The Observation and Progress Report is an example of a
competency-based (or criterion-referenced) assessment.
Criteria Guidelines, rules, characteristics, or dimensions that are used to
judge the quality of candidate performance. Criteria indicate what we
value in candidate responses, products or performances. They may
be holistic, analytic, general, or specific. Scoring rubrics and rating
scales are based on criteria and define what the criteria mean and
how they are used.
Criterion-
referenced
assessment
(competency-
based
assessment)
An assessment where an individual's performance is compared to a
specific learning objective or performance standard and NOT to the
performance of other candidates or the expected performance of a
candidate at a given point of time. Criterion-referenced assessment
tells us how well candidates are performing on specific outcomes
rather that just telling how their performance compares to other
candidates or expectations at a given time. In criterion-referenced
assessments, it is possible that none, or all, of the examinees will
reach a particular goal or performance standard.
Holistic scoring Evaluating candidate work in which the score is based on an overall
impression of candidate performance rather than multiple dimensions
of performance (analytic scoring).
Implicit criteria Unstated guidelines, rules, characteristics, or dimensions --not stated in the scoring rubric or rating scale--that are sometimes applied during the scoring process. Applying implicit criteria detracts from the validity and meaningfulness of the assessment data collected.
Indicators Measures used to track performance over time.
Inter-rater
reliability
The consistency with which two or more judges rate the work or
performance of test takers.
Norm-referenced
assessment
An assessment where candidate performance or performances are
compared to that or those of a larger group. The purpose of a norm-
referenced assessment is usually to sort candidates and not to
measure achievement towards some criterion of performance.
Outcomes Changes in learners, such as improvements in teaching skills, that
occur as a direct result of their participation in a teacher education
program; knowledge, attitudes, skills, etc., that the candidate
acquires as a result of a learning experience.
Performance level A standard description of a candidate's ability at a given level in terms of a standard or outcome; a profile of skill levels for a candidate can thus be assigned and used for placement, instructional, or reporting purposes.
Rating scales Values given to candidate performance. Evaluations are made on
predetermined criteria for documenting where learners fall on a
continuum of proficiency. Rating scales include numerical scales
and/or descriptive scales.
Rubrics Specific sets of criteria that clearly define for both candidate and
instructor what a range of acceptable and unacceptable performance
looks like. Criteria define descriptors of ability at each level of
performance and assign values to each level. Levels referred to are
proficiency levels which describe a continuum from excellent to
unacceptable product or performance.
Adapted from: Glossary of Useful Terms, http://www.sabes.org/assessment/glossary.htm
MAKING CONNECTIONS WITH THE FSEHD
OBSERVATION AND PROGRESS REPORT (OPR)
Task: To be reflective and examine your teaching behaviors using the OPR
1. Select one Planning or Action Indicator from the OPR that represents one of your strengths as a teacher. Write the indicator here:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
2. List 2-3 reasons why you selected this indicator and how you and use exemplary practices with the indicator:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Now select another OPR indicator, which might be a priority for improvement with your teaching. Write the indicator here:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
4. List 2-3 reasons why you selected this indicator and how you plan on improving in this area:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
The next step would be to take time and reflect on your teaching behaviors, select two-three
indicators, and then develop a strategic improvement plan. Use S.M.A.R.T. (Specific, Measurable,
Attainable, Realistic/Relevant and Timely) goals!
4/26/2011
18
Questions and Answers
THANK YOU
STAY IN TOUCH WITH THE OPP
We have an “OPEN DOOR” policy!
Also-Check the OPP website on RIC for updated information for Cooperating Teachers
4/26/2011
19
“H l i t b tt th li “Helping to better the lives of others is the greatest
of all achievements.”Alan Shawn Feinstein
b. Introduction of the performance level headings (unacceptable, developing, acceptable, target)
0 Unacceptable
1-2 Developing
3-4 Acceptable
5-6 Target
Not present. The candidate does not include the indicator in his/her planning, action, or reflection.
Elements of the indicator are clearly present but are partially or ineffectively carried out. The candidate is developing an awareness and may be beginning to meet the knowledge, skills, and competencies needed to meet the needs of some learners.
Elements of the indicator are of good quality, but there is room for improvement. The candidate knows and demonstrates the methods, skills, and strategies needed to meet the needs of most learners.
High quality implementation of indicator. The candidate knows and consistently demonstrates the methods, skills, and strategies needed to meet students’ diverse needs and interests.
c. Indicators:
i. Goal was to include multiple, observable indicators to: 1) make explicit what is being assessed and 2) reduce the need for the assessor to write many, repetitive, general comments.
ii. Provide granular statistics about every dimension of a performance. d. Designed to detect wide variation in performance by offering 7 possible ratings
(Unacceptable:0; Developing: 1-2; Acceptable: 3-4; Target: 5-6) e. Accommodates faculty’s frequent requests for “wider” scale (e.g., + and .5
ratings). When we had ratings of 1-2-3 or 1-2-3-4, faculty often asked for ratings of 2+ or 2.5, etc.
f. Think of 0, 1, 3, and 5 as the base ratings for unacceptable, developing, acceptable, and target. Ratings of 2, 4, and 6 account give raters the opportunity to describe performance that is a little higher than basic performance for that performance level – the equivalent of a + or .5 on old rubrics
g. Criterion-based: candidates are measured against defined (and objective) criteria. Used to establish a person’s competence (whether s/he can do something).
iii. Contrast with Normative: Assessing candidate relative to other students undertaking the assessment
iv. Contrast with Developmental: Assessing candidate’s present performance against expected performance at a particular stage
v. Stress: We are assessing candidates relative to expected performance of a beginning professional teacher! The criterion is the same at every observation, but our expectations for scores will shift.
vi. Provide examples. E.g., a student teacher might have a number of developing ratings at his/her first observation. That’s ok at this stage of development. Our expectations for performance will grow as the candidate progresses, but our criterion will remain stable.
h. Goal is to capture candidate growth
i. If the same standard/criterion is applied at each observation in student teaching, we would expect to be able to detect growth in candidates’ teaching skills
4. Scoring practice (40 minutes) a. Implementation
i. View short clips of “medium level” classroom instruction. Some aspects of instruction are implemented well, and others aren’t. See clip #3 at: http://physicsed.buffalostate.edu/AZTEC/RTOP/RTOP_full/using_RTOP_4.html
ii. Ask participants to rate instruction in this clip on the Implementation, Climate, and Classroom Management indicators
iii. Discuss individual and group ratings in small groups iv. Discuss in large group, highlighting the use of the same criterion for
student teachers no matter what point they are at in student teaching
5. Making connections with the assessment instrument (15) a. Review of how the workshop can assist the teachers with reflective practices of
their own teaching b. Individual and small group work sharing two ways the workshop will assist the
participants with assessing their own teaching behaviors and practices
6. Wrap Up and Session Evaluation (10) a. L (the L part of the graphic organizer of K-W-L)-participants share what they
learned about assessment b. Summarize main ideas of session c. Ask participants to fill out session evaluation which includes question about what
they need next in terms of guidance in using the Observation and Progress Report and reflection of their own teaching behaviors
(Total: 120 minutes)