Assessing and evaluating teacher preparation programs

assessing and evaluating teacher preparation programs

assessing and evaluating teacher preparation programs

apa task force report

Task Force Members Mary M. Brabeck, PhD Carol Anne Dwyer, PhD Kurt F. Geisinger, PhD Ronald W. Marx, PhD George H. Noell, PhD Robert C. Pianta, PhD Frank C. Worrell, PhD (Chair)

Staff Rena F. Subotnik, PhD

The American Psychological Association wishes to acknowledge the support of apa's Board of Educational Affairs (bea) and the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (caep) in developing this report. This report was received by the American Psychological Association's Council of Representatives on February 21, 2014.

Assessing and Evaluating Teacher Preparation Programs

Available online at: teacher-preparation-programs.pdf

Printed copies available from: Center for Psychology in Schools and Education Education Directorate American Psychological Association 750 First Street, ne Washington, dc 20002-4242 Phone: 202.336.5923 tdd/tty: 202.336.6123 Email: rsubotnik@

Suggested bibliographic reference: Worrell, F. Brabeck, M., Dwyer, C., Geisinger, K., Marx, R., Noell, G., and Pianta R. (2014). Assessing and evaluating teacher preparation programs. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Copyright? 2014 by the American Psychological Association. This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without fees or permission provided that acknowledgment is given to the American Psychological Association. This material may not be reprinted, translated, or distributed electronically without prior permission in writing from the publisher. For permission, contact apa, Rights and Permissions, 750 First Street, ne, Washington, DC 20002-4242.

apa reports synthesize current psychological knowledge in a given area and may offer recommendations for future action. They do not constitute apa policy or commit apa to the activities described therein.

Cover photo used under Creative Commons license. Originally posted on Flickr by U.S. Department of Education.

contents

Abstract

01

Executive Summary

03

Assessing and Evaluating Teacher Preparation Programs

05

Using Student Learning Outcome Data to Assess

Teacher Education Programs

13

Using Standardized Observations to Evaluate

Teacher Education Programs

19

Using Surveys to Evaluate Teacher Education Programs

23

Cross-Cutting Themes in This Report

27

Recommendations

29

Task Force Member Biographies

33

References

37

Appendix

40

abstract

Effective teaching has long been an issue of national concern, but in recent years focus on the effectiveness of programs to produce high-quality teachers has sharpened. Long-standing achievement gaps persist despite large-scale legislative changes at the federal and state levels, and American students continue to show poorer performance on international tests compared to peers in other developed nations. These and other factors have resulted in the creation of new accreditation standards for teacher education programs. These standards, developed by the Council for the Accreditation of Education Programs (caep), require teacher education programs to demonstrate their graduates are capable of having strong positive effects on student learning.

The data and methods required to evaluate the effectiveness of teacher education programs ought to be informed by well-established scientific methods that have evolved in the science of psychology, which at its core addresses the measurement of behavior. Recent work highlights the potential utility of three methods for assessing teacher education program effectiveness: (1) value-added assessments of student achievement, (2) standardized observation protocols, and (3) surveys of teacher performance. These methodologies can be used by institutions to demonstrate that the teacher candidates who complete their programs are well prepared to support student learning. In this light, we discuss the evaluation of teacher education programs using

these three methodologies, highlight the utility and limitations of each of these methodologies for evaluating teacher education programs, and provide a set of recommendations for their optimal use by teacher education programs and other stakeholders in teacher preparation, including states and professional associations.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download