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
- Establish empirical expectations
- Measure Performance
- Compare Expectations & Performance
- 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.