missouri department of elementary and secondary education first-year teacher survey, 2007 january...
Post on 19-Dec-2015
220 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
First-Year Teacher Survey, 2007
January 11, 2008Jefferson City, Missouri
Bill ElderUniversity of Missouri
Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis
Available at: www.oseda.missouri.edu/presentations
“Good News”
• Both Teacher and Principal Ratings are quite positive about Preparation
• Linkages from DESE core data and web survey applications worked well and can be improved
• Response rates for web survey were comparatively high:– Teachers 60%– Principals 50%
“Good or Very Good”Teachers 84% --- Principals 80%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Poor orVery Poor
Fair Good VeryGood
Percent Rating of Quality of Teacher Preparation Programs, DESE First-Year Teacher Survey, 2007
Teachers (3,091)
Principals (1,793)
Overview• Background
– Source of Items– Methods
• Reports (descriptive statistics) -- CDs– Statewide frequency reports– Institution specific frequency reports (n>5)– Statewide cross-tabulations reports
• Review 2007 Results• Discussion
– Future directions – Review of questions– Additional analyses
Background—Items
• Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Standards (MoSTEPS)
• Teacher and Principal Items not aligned as well as possible but quite similar
• May desire additional items (mentoring)
Background--Methods
• 100% of Missouri first-year teachers contacted by letter and email (@ 5,150)
• First-year teachers defined by DESE Core Data • Survey is confidential but not anonymous
(security)• Principal survey specifically referenced
individual first-year teachers• Principal responses were limited to no more than
six first-year teachers (if >6, randomly selected from Mo.)
Background--Methods
• Communications included individual letter from the Commissioner and email follow-up until over 50% response rate achieved
• Gathered as late in the year as possible April-May 2007
• Relatively short survey with easy responses formats – related to response– Characteristics in Core Data– Short open-ended question possible in 2008
Reports and CD
• Statewide frequency reports for teacher and principal surveys
• Institution specific frequency reports for teacher and principal surveys (n > 5)
• Selected statewide cross tabulations for teacher and principal surveys
• Additional reports possible in March
Review 2007 Results Teachers 84% --- Principals 80%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Poor orVery Poor
Fair Good VeryGood
Percent Rating of Quality of Teacher Preparation Programs, DESE First-Year Teacher Survey, 2007
Teachers (3,091)
Principals (1,793)
Question #20 Teachers
Question #14 Principals
Factor Analysis of Teacher SurveySuggest Five Survey Dimensions
Dimension Teacher Questions
• Overall Rating 20• Institution specific customized questions• Additional certifications• More specific categories (as N allows)• Teaching outside Initial certification – additional cert.• Professional development• Continuing education• Classroom Management• Assessment For Learning• Subject Mastery 4• Planning for Teaching 5-10• Teaching 11-17• Using Technology 18-19
Subject Level Mastery -- Teachers
4Having a thorough knowledge of the subjects that I teach.
72%
Planning for Teaching -- Teachers
5Understanding how students learn and
develop.75%
6Understanding how students differ in their
approaches to learning.76%
7Designing lessons that address different
learning styles.69%
8Delivering lessons that work well for
different learning styles.66%
9Planning lessons based on curriculum goals
and performance standards.68%
10Facilitating higher levels of learning by
employing a variety of instructional strategies
71%
Teaching -- Teachers
11Creating a classroom learning environment
that encourages student engagement.75%
12Using communication skills to effectively
foster learning.76%
13Using assessments effectively to evaluate
student academic achievement.66%
14 Using professional instructional practices. 77%
15 Using ethical instructional practices. 81%
16Fostering continuous professional
development.76%
17Interacting effectively with colleagues,
parents and other members of my learning community.
74%
Technology -- Teachers
18Using technology to enhance my personal
productivity.67%
19Using technology effectively as part of my
instructional strategies.63%
Subject Level Mastery -- Principals
1Using knowledge in the subject(s) that s/he teaches.
75%
Planning for Teaching -- Principals
2Understanding of theories about how students learn.
63%
3Understanding of theories about how students develop.
61%
4Designing lessons that address a variety of learning styles.
56%
5Designing lessons aligned to curriculum goals and performance standards.
69%
Teaching -- Principals
6Using effective instructional strategies to attain high levels of learning.
64%
7Creating an environment that encourages active student engagement.
70%
8 Using effective communication skills. 71%
9Using assessments effectively to evaluate student academic achievement.
61%
10Demonstrating knowledge of ethical professional practices.
77%
11 Striving for continuous professional growth. 76%
12Interacting effectively with colleagues to support student learning.
76%
Technology -- Principals
13Using technology to enhance instruction.
66%
Selected Cross-Tabulations
• Percent Free and Reduced Lunch• District Geographic Locale• District Enrollment Size• Recent Completer • In or Out of State Educational Program• Public or Private Institution• District Accreditation Status• Others …..
Principals Teachers
FR Lunch N Pct N Pct
Less Than 25% 323 17.9 572 18.4
25% to 49% 901 50.1 1,455 46.8
50% or More 576 32.0 1,083 34.8
Totals 1,800 100.0 3,110 100.0
Cross Tabulation Factors
Principals Teachers
Geographic Location
N Pct N Pct
Large City 127 7.1 236 7.7
Mid-Size City 165 9.3 280 9.1
Fringe Large City 510 28.6 906 29.4
Fringe Mid-Size City 79 4.4 144 4.7
Town 302 16.9 519 16.9
Rural Areas 601 33.7 993 32.3
Totals 1,784 100.0 3,078 100.0
Cross Tabulation Factors
Principals Teachers
District Enrollment Size
N Pct N Pct
400 or Less 206 11.4 300 9.7
801 - 2000 318 17.7 514 16.5
2001 - 6000 534 29.7 986 31.7
6000 or More 550 30.6 1,015 32.6
Totals 1,800 100.0 3,110 100.0
Cross Tabulation Factors
Principals Teachers
Recent Completer N Pct N Pct
Before 2006 420 43.2 1,344 51.8
Since 2006 552 56.8 1,250 48.2
Cross Tabulation Factors
Totals 972 100 2,594 100
Principals Teachers
In or Out of State Program
N Pct N Pct
In State 1,121 96.3 2,433 78.6
Out of State 43 3.7 662 21.4
Totals 1,164 100 3,095 100
Cross Tabulation Factors
Principals Teachers
Type of Program N Pct N Pct
Non-Missouri 118 10.1 871 28.0
Private 368 31.5 802 25.8
Public 679 58.4 1,439 46.2
Totals 1,165 100.0 3,112 100.0
Cross Tabulation Factors
Principals Teachers
District Accreditation
N Pct N Pct
Accredited 1,671 94.2 2,897 94.7
Provisional 103 5.8 163 5.3
Totals 1,774 100.0 3,060 100.0
Cross Tabulation Factors
Rating of Quality of Teacher Preparation
Teachers #20 Principals #14
• Good or Very Good 84%
• FRL• Size• Recent Completer• In-Out of State• Accreditation Status
• Good or Very Good
80%• FRL• Size• Type of Program• Accreditation Status
What overall rating would you give the quality of your professional education preparation program?
10.74 13.44 15.4 13.63
42.9647.33 48.52 46.94
44.54 36.87 33.3 37.03
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
T20
What overall rating would you give the quality of your professional education preparation program?
16.1 13.7 14.1 13.2 13.0 13.6
44.3 47.3 51.2 48.1 44.4 46.9
34.6 36.6 32.2 36.6 40.8 37.0
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 or More Total
Enrollment Category
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
T20
What overall rating would you give the quality of your professional education preparation program?
14.4 11.9 13.2
46.9 44.6 45.8
36.6 41.3 38.8
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Before 2006 Since 2006 Total
Program Completion Year
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
T20
What overall rating would you give the quality of the professional education preparation program?
14.0 12.0
47.2 45.9
36.3 40.2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
In State Out of State
Program Location
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
T20
What overall rating would you give the quality of the professional education preparation program?
13.4 17.3 13.6
46.748.8
46.8
37.6 30.3 37.2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
A P Total
Accreditation Status
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
T20
What is your overall rating of the teacher’s preparation?
11.15 13.7317.31 14.41
39.3247.43 41.26 44
46.1335.04 33.57 36.57
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
P14
What is your overall rating of the teacher’s preparation?
16.67 17.71 16.72 11.89 13.5 14.41
46.08 38.02 48.26 46.6 40.33 44
30.39 39.06 31.23 36.98 40.69 36.57
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 orMore
Total
Enrollment Category
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
P14
What is your overall rating of the teacher’s preparation?
9.4 14.99 12.98 13.25
46.1547.14
43.07 44.66
40.17 32.43 41.59 38.55
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Non-MissouriInstitution
Private Public Total
Program type
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
P14
What is your overall rating of the teacher’s preparation?
13.17
28.43
14.05
44.86
36.27
44.36
37.6422.55
36.77
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Accredited Provisional Total
Accreditation Status
Poor or Very Poor Fair Good Very Good
P14
Knowledge of Subjects Taught
Teachers #4 Principals #1
• Good or Very Good 72%
• FRL• Locale• Size
• Good or Very Good
75%• Size• FRL• Recent Completer• Accreditation Status
Having a thorough knowledge of the subjects that I teach.
19.96 23.88 25.39 23.69
42.21 39.16 40.59 40.22
34.5 32.48 29.66 31.87
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T4
Having a thorough knowledge of the subjects that I teach.
27.0 28.6 26.0 24.5 21.1 24.3
36.7 37.1 39.3 38.7 38.4 38.4
26.3 27.6 26.6 31.4 33.1 30.3
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 or More Total
Enrollment Category
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T4
Having a thorough knowledge of the subjects that I teach.
21.6 24.0 21.4 21.5 25.6 25.6 23.7
40.3 34.1 40.7 43.8 39.7 41.1 40.2
33.9 36.9 34.2 29.9 30.0 29.0 31.9
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Large City Mid-SizeCity
UrbanFringe of
Large City
UrbanFringe ofMid-Size
City
Town RuralAreas
Total
Geographic Location
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T4
Using knowledge in the subject(s) that s/he teaches.
13.62 22.56 24.83 21.68
43.0344.33
45.83 44.58
39.63 31.33 24.83 30.74
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P1
Using knowledge in the subject(s) that s/he teaches.
26.7 21.88 24.21 20.41 19.49 21.68
46.6 47.4 48.43 44.76 40.44 44.58
23.79 27.6 25.79 32.58 35.52 30.74
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 orMore
Total
Enrollment Category
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P1
Using knowledge in the subject(s) that s/he teaches.
24.76 18.3 21.09
45.4846.2 45.88
27.62 33.51 30.97
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Before 2006 Since 2006 Total
Program Completion Year
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P1
Using knowledge in the subject(s) that s/he teaches.
20.6
36.89
21.55
45.21
35.92
44.67
31.7418.45
30.96
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Accredited Provisional Total
Accreditation Status
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P1
Addressing Different Learning Styles
Teachers #7 Principals #4
• Good or Very Good 69%
• FRL• Recent Completers• Accreditation Status
• Good or Very Good
56%• FRL• Type of Program• Accreditation Status
Designing lessons that address different learning styles.
22.55 24.55 24.79 24.27
36.36 38.97 38.58 38.35
35.49 30.41 27.47 30.33
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T7
Designing lessons that address different learning styles.
24.8 21.0 23.0
35.7 40.7 38.1
31.8 32.9 32.3
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Before 2006 Since 2006 Total
Program Completion Year
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T7
Designing lessons that address different learning styles.
24.320.4
24.1
38.538.9
38.5
30.7 24.7 30.4
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
A P Total
Accreditation Status
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T7
Designing lessons that address a variety of learning styles.
20.74 26.25 26.91 25.47
34.6738.26 34.38 36.37
38.08 28.14 27.43 29.7
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P4
Designing lessons that address a variety of learning styles.
23.73 29.97 24.34 26.05
34.7538.42
37.54 37.53
33.9 24.25 33.14 30.42
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-MissouriInstitution
Private Public Total
Program type
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P4
Designing lessons that address a variety of learning styles.
24.87
33.01
25.34
37.33
27.18
36.74
30.5617.48
29.8
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Accredited Provisional Total
Accreditation Status
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P4
Creating Engaging Learning Environment
Teachers #11 Principals #7
• Good or Very Good 75%
• FRL• Locale• Size
• Good or Very Good
70%• Size• FRL• Type of Program• Accreditation Status
Creating a classroom learning environment that encourages student engagement.
15.79 20.92 21.56 20.2
38.4239.85 40.33 39.75
42.28 34 32.71 35.08
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T11
Creating a classroom learning environment that encourages student engagement.
25.8 22.1 19.5 19.4 19.1 20.2
40.336.7 43.8 39.1 39.1 39.8
28.238.1 30.9 36.7 36.8 35.1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 or More Total
Enrollment Category
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T11
Creating a classroom learning environment that encourages student engagement.
21.3 15.7 20.1
40.038.9
39.8
33.3 42.3 35.2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
In State Out of State Total
Program Location
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T11
Creating a classroom learning environment that encourages student engagement.
18.3 18.1 22.6 20.2
39.4 40.5 39.5 39.7
39.5 36.4 31.7 35.1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-MissouriInstitution
Private Public Total
Program Type
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T11
Creating an environment that encourages active student engagement.
13.3523.97
22.78 21.69
36.6535.85 32.35 34.87
45.3433.41 32 35.09
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P7
Creating an environment that encourages active student engagement.
22.82 21.99 22.96 20.04 22.04 21.69
38.8335.08 38.05
35.77 30.6 34.87
26.7 34.55 29.56 37.27 39.53 35.09
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 orMore
Total
Enrollment Category
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P7
Creating an environment that encourages active student engagement.
21.39
25.24
21.61
35.65
23.3
34.93
35.95 27.18 35.44
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Accredited Provisional Total
Accreditation Status
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P7
Using Assessments Effectively
Teachers #13 Principals #9
• Good or Very Good 66%
• FRL• Size• In-Out State
• Good or Very Good
61%• FRL• Size• Accreditation Status
Using assessments effectively to evaluate student academic achievement.
26.19 25.52 29.21 26.92
34.09 40.48 39.35 38.91
33.92 26.76 23.72 27.02
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T13
Using assessments effectively to evaluate student academic achievement.
33.1 28.9 29.9 25.2 24.6 26.9
36.1 38.8 38.940.7 38.0 38.9
22.4 25.2 23.5 27.9 29.9 27.0
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 or More Total
Enrollment Category
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T13
Using assessments effectively to evaluate student academic achievement.
27.8 23.6 26.9
38.3 41.0 38.9
26.6 29.2 27.2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
In State Out of State Total
Program Location
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
T13
Using assessments effectively to evaluate student achievement.
23.91 32.0732.7 30.81
42.2439.87 35.13 38.77
28.26 21.71 20.87 22.62
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Less Than 25% 25% to 49% 50% or More Total
Pct. Free or Reduced Lunch
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P9
Using assessments effectively to evaluate student achievement.
33.98 34.38 32.49 30.45 27.74 30.81
37.38 36.46 39.75 38.72 39.6 38.77
18.93 21.35 20.82 23.68 24.45 22.62
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
400 or Less 401 - 800 801 - 2000 2001 - 6000 6000 orMore
Total
Enrollment Category
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P9
Using assessments effectively to evaluate student achievement.
29.81
44.12
30.64
40.01
24.51
39.12
23.412.75 22.78
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Accredited Provisional Total
Accreditation Status
Not or Inadequately Prepared Adequately PreparedWell Prepared Very Well Prepared
P9
Discussion
• General Questions
• Future directions
• Review of survey questions
• Additional analyses
Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
First-Year Teacher Survey, 2007
January 11, 2008Jefferson City, Missouri
Bill ElderUniversity of Missouri
Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis
Available at: www.oseda.missouri.edu/presentations
top related