Assessment of Teacher Preparation in Louisiana

Assessment of Teacher Preparation in Louisiana:
Catalyst for Value Added Assessment

By George H. Noell, Ph.D.

Redesign in Louisiana & the Blue Ribbon Commission

Louisiana’s Teacher Preparation Programs: Four Levels of Effectiveness

[Graphics: 1) A picture of young school children, 2) A colorful pyramid chart highlighting each level]

Level 1: Effectiveness of Planning (Redesign of Teacher Preparation Programs)

Level 2: Effectiveness of Implementation (NCATE- Comprehensive Assessment System)

Level 3: Effectiveness of Impact (Teacher Preparation Accountability System)

Level 4: Effectiveness of Growth in Student Learning (Value-Added Teacher Preparation Program Assessment)

·  The desire for meaningful assessment

·  Creating a climate of striving and shared resources

Challenges in Assessing Teacher Preparation

·  The challenge of measures

o  Achievement versus opinions

·  Geography

·  Heterogeneous schools & classes

·  Data management

·  Technical issues

·  Comparison to what?

General Assessment Approach

1. Establish empirical expectations
2. Measure Performance
3. Compare Expectations & Performance
4. Act on the Results

o  Detailed follow-up & policy issues

Hierarchical Linear Statistical Model

[Graphic: A concept map showing top-down effect of factors that affect schools, teachers and students.]

Interesting Early Findings
2008 Alternative Programs Findings

·  An adverse result in English Language Arts

o  Program review indicated structural flaw in ELA preparation

·  An adverse result in Reading

o  Program review indicated concerns with design and quality control of reading methods instruction

·  Both Programs revised preparation without external mandates

Range of TPP Results for Alternative Programs: Mathematics 2010

[Graphics: 1) A picture of school children, 2) a bar graph comparing the TTP scores of programs with weak alternative certification and strong alternative certification (the average score of experienced teachers is also highlighted in this graph)]

Where are we going now

·  Subgroup analyses for universities

·  Value added assessment for practicing teachers and students

·  Annual warning indicator system for students

Using student longitudinal data to build a trajectory

[Graphic: A line graph comparing two students’ test scores from 3rd- 5th grade]

Which student made more progress?

[Graphic: A line graph comparing each of the previously profiled students’ predicted 6th grade scores and their actual 6th grade scores]

So what does this look like for a class?

[Graphic: A line graph that illustrates predicted and actual scores for a significant portion of a class. Almost all of the actual scores are a little higher than the predicted scores.]

Variables being used to predict achievement in the Louisiana Pilot

v  Prior achievement on state assessments (ELA, reading, mathematics, science, social studies)

v  Limited English Proficiency

v  Gifted Status

v  Section 504 Status

v  Free Lunch Status

v  Reduced Lunch Status

v  Student attendance

v  Disability status (emotionally disturbed, speech and language, mild mental retardation, specific learning disability, other health impaired, other)

v  Discipline Record

*Note: VAA is based on a mathematical model that determines how much each factor contributes to estimating expected student achievement. By far the strongest predictor is prior achievement.