| Sponsor: |
Presidential Session |
| Cosponsor: |
Division L - Educational Policy and Politics |
| Cosponsor: |
Division H - Research, Evaluation and Assessment in Schools |
| Cosponsor: |
AERA Sessions |
| Schedule Information: |
Scheduled Time: Mon, Apr 16 - 2:15pm - 3:45pm Building/Room: Reception following immediately after the Presidential Session Time: Mon, Apr 16 - 4:05pm - 5:35pm Place: Vancouver Convention Center, Floor Second Level - West Room 215 & 216 Abstract This session will present teacher evaluation practices and approaches to measure teacher effectiveness around the world. Leading international scholars in teacher evaluation will offer perspectives on the definition, trends in theory, and applications of measuring teacher effectiveness. Session Summary One of the overarching challenges in developing a fair and balanced educational accountability system in any country is designing a teacher effectiveness program. The vital question asks how to recruit, identify and develop effective teachers. For example, possible criteria include: student performance, curriculum, instruction and assessment, compensation, classroom size, professional development resources, school autonomy, and school leadership. It is well known that evaluative practices vary across the globe. Approaches to measuring teacher effectiveness should be well understood and discussed before implementing evaluative procedures since the chosen system can significantly impact student learning. Therefore, via this session researchers and policy makers worldwide can learn through an internationally comparative lens. The purpose of this symposium is to provide attendees with the opportunity to learn about teacher evaluation practices and teacher effectiveness around the world. Leading international scholars in teacher evaluation will offer perspectives on the definition, trends in theory, and applications of measuring teacher effectiveness. Understanding different approaches for evaluating teacher effectiveness is more important than ever before. On February 17, 2009, President Obama allocated $4.35 billion of the funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) for the Race to the Top Fund. This competitive grant program rewards states for improving student achievement. One of the most critical components of the Race to the Top Fund is measuring teacher effectiveness. Presenters: 1) Title: The Evaluation of Teachers and Schools Using Growth Models: Hope Versus Reality (USA) Author: Robert Lissitz, Ph. D. University of Maryland This paper begins with a short overview of the literature regarding Student Growth Modeling (SGM) and Value Added Modeling (VAM). Included are comments regarding the motivation and goals for this interest, from NCLB, and RTTT, as well as a more general interest from those concerned with teaching performance effectiveness. The paper progresses to a review of the literature as it addresses the assessment of teachers and schools using more formal statistical methods. From there, the paper moves to a consideration of a comparison of SGM models that permit aggregating across teachers or schools to provide teacher and school performance information (VAM). The focus is on relatively simple models. From there the paper addresses the literature, as it currently exists, regarding issues of reliability and validity as applied to evaluating teachers and evaluating schools. Finally the paper closes with some conjecture about the future and the likelihood of success. The overall tone of the paper is one of skepticism and pessimism regarding the likelihood of success in this endeavor. 2) Title: Un-Finished Business: Teacher Evaluation and Effectiveness in Finland Author: Pasi Sahlberg, Ph. D. Director General CIMO (Centre for International Mobility and Cooperation) Dr. Sahlberg will represent the Finland’s perspective. Unlike the models of measuring teacher effectiveness (such as VAM) used in USA which are based on hard data (such as test scores), Finland is using an approach that contains attributes like personal commitment, level of collegiality, engagement in pedagogical development and teacher leadership. His paper will explain in detail how Finland is coping with the issue of teacher performance and evaluation. Dr. Sahlberg will focus his paper around the theme of Finland’s experience in measuring teacher effectiveness. 3) Title: A Singapore Perspective of Teacher Education: The Old Man, the Mountain and the Child Author: Tan Oon Seng, Ph. D. Dean of Teacher Education at the National Institute of Education Teacher development in Singapore is unique from the continuum approach from initial teacher education to life-long professional development where goal congruence and pragmatic policies and practices amongst university, schools and the Ministry of Education help steer the teaching profession towards high standards and commitment. Teaching is a calling and effective teachers have a unity of purpose in their personal aspirations, beliefs, interests and competencies with a view of impacting the next generation and a system of evaluation and accountability builds on (a) Learner-centred values, (b) Teacher identity values (c) The values of service to the profession and community. Professor Oon-Seng Tan, will address the key factors to a successful teacher education policy in Singapore, including teacher evaluation in light of empowering teachers and enhancing teacher professionalism. He will also address the challenges of diverse societal expectations, the impact of rapid educational transformations and balancing accountability measures and autonomous professional trust. 4) Title: Washington Teacher/Principal Evaluation Project (USA) Eight school districts and a consortium of eight districts in Washington State are participating in a pilot study to implement Senate Bill 6696, which establishes new criteria for evaluating educators. The nine pilot sites are working with the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) to develop nine new and innovative teacher evaluation systems that comply with this new state legislation. Washington OSPI partnered with American Institutes for Research (AIR) on a project to understand the current state of evaluation in Washington, document pilot sites’ development processes, examine pilot sites’ experiences and perspectives during development, and provide formative feedback to help pilot sites implement high-quality evaluation systems. 5) Title: Teacher Evaluation Systems and Multi-cultural Commonalities and Challenges: England, Mexico, Portugal, Finland, and Turkey Authors: Dr. Jacqueline Kelleher, Sacred Heart University & Bridgeport Board of Education Dr. John Ramos, Superintendent of Bridgeport Public Schools, Connecticut Cynthia Fernandes, Director of Learning & Teaching, Bridgeport Public Schools; Bob Trefry, Bridgeport Board of Education Chair, Retired CEO of Bridgeport Abstract Merit-based pay or pay for performance. These terms are shaping national and state conversations on school reform, student achievement, and teacher competencies. Emerging policies aimed at rewarding teaching “effectiveness” and removing those less competent based on student achievement data are imposed on districts for implementation, often with little opportunity to examine “proven” systems for alignment with their vision and numerous mandated initiatives. Teacher unions, antiquated regulatory systems, and anxiety around testing impede a district’s ability to candidly discuss and compare. Bridgeport Public Schools recognizes these tensions. Teacher evaluation systems are clearly connected to improved student outcomes, and Bridgeport, currently in its eighth year of “Needs Improvement” under NCLB, is investigating national and international models to inform district-level policies. With a population of 21,000 children, speaking 123 languages, affected by significant poverty, dropout rates, and skill deficits, Bridgeport turned to merit-based models from multiple cultures to compare more critically with US performance-related pay structures. Using survey findings from 27 countries conducted by the Organization for Economic and Cooperative Development, Bridgeport identified incentive systems from six countries with tensions paralleling our own, including national labor agreements for teachers, basis for financial awards, professional staff making decisions, assessments performed by education administrators, and the measured student achievement. Superintendent Ramos and his Board of Education, a newly reconstituted board appointed by its State Commissioner, collaboratively reviewed literature, compared site-based documents, and conducted interviews with administrators from six international merit models: England, Mexico, Finland, Portugal, Turkey, and Canada. Our paper describes model components for each country reviewed, and highlights variations in scope, structure, and incentives. Finally, we evaluate the merit and worth of each model based on our findings in the context of guiding questions: Does merit-based pay improve education? Does incentivizing improve the quality of teaching? Does it help attract and retain quality teachers? Does it discourage teachers from going to low performing schools? Can teacher merit be successfully measured - or does varying student performance get in the way? Bridgeport has drawn conclusions from these global examples and is using findings to inform policy and strategic planning concerning student achievement. Discussant: Linda Darling-Hammond, Ph.D. Stanford University Charles Ducommon Professor of Education Co-Director School Redesign Network (SRN) Dr. Darling-Hammond’s research, teaching, and policy work focus on issues of school restructuring, teacher quality, and educational equity. Among Dr. Darling-Hammond’s more than 300 publications are Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and be Able to Do (with John Bransford, for the National Academy of Education, winner of the Pomeroy Award from AACTE), Teaching as the Learning Profession: A Handbook of Policy and Practice (Jossey-Bass: 1999) (co-edited with Gary Sykes), which received the National Staff Development Council’s Outstanding Book Award for 2000; and The Right to Learn: A Blueprint for Schools that Work, recipient of the American Educational Research Association’s Outstanding Book Award for 1998. Chairs: Whitney Wall, Ph. D. Queen's University - Belfast Burcu Kaniskan, Ph.D. University of Connecticut Session Organizer: Antionette Stroter, Ph.D. Liberty University Burcu Kaniskan, Ph.D. Neag School of Education University of Connecticut Whitney Wall, Ph. D. candidate Queen's University - Belfast |
2/18/12
AERA 2012-- Session
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)