G2TT
来源类型Publication
Measuring Teachers' Effectiveness: A Report from Phase 3 of Pennsylvania's Pilot of the Framework for Teaching
Stephen Lipscomb; Jeffrey Terziev; and Duncan Chaplin
发表日期2015-04-23
出版者Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research
出版年2015
语种英语
概述In this report we analyzed data on two measures of teacher performance—one (the Framework for Teaching, or FFT) is based largely on classroom observations, and the other (value-added measures, or VAM) is based on student test scores. ",
摘要

Key Findings:

  • Teacher performance, as captured by the Framework for Teaching (FFT), was generally rated in the top two possible performance categories (distinguished or proficient) in 2012–2013 and 2011–2012 in the Pennsylvania districts covered in our study.
  • Less than 0.1 percent of the teachers in our study were rated in the bottom category (failing).
  • The FFT scores were internally consistent, meaning that the domains and the components within each domain appear to be measuring similar concepts.
  • The correlations of the FFT scores with value-added measures scores were all positive and generally statistically significant, ranging from 0.19 to 0.22 by domain.

In this report we analyzed data on two measures of teacher performance—one (the Framework for Teaching, or FFT) is based largely on classroom observations, and the other (value-added measures, or VAM) is based on student test scores. The data we analyzed cover 6,676 teachers from 269 districts in the state of Pennsylvania, including Pittsburgh public schools. The observation-based data describe teacher performance on the 22 components of the FFT of Charlotte Danielson. Each of these components is designed to capture a separate teaching practice. We used these data to estimate four domain scores and one overall Professional Practice Rating (PPR) score. We merged these scores with data on teachers’ estimated contributions to student achievement growth. Based on these pilot data from the 2012–2013 school year, we estimate that, although less than 13 percent of teachers received the top rating (distinguished) for the overall PPR score, almost 85 percent were rated in the second highest category (proficient). Less than 0.1 percent were rated in the bottom category (failing). The remaining teachers (around 2.6 percent) received needs improvement ratings. FFT scores were internally consistent, meaning that the domains and the components within each domain appear to be measuring similar concepts. Teachers with higher FFT scores tended to produce greater student achievement growth. The correlations of the FFT scores with VAM scores were all positive and generally statistically significant, ranging from 0.19 to 0.22 by domain. We compared the results based on the 2012–2013 data with results based on 2011–2012 data from a previous pilot phase. For the most part, the findings were similar. More than 90 percent of teachers were rated in the top two performance categories in both phases, although the fraction of ratings in the top two categories decreased somewhat in Pittsburgh (which contributed more teachers to the pilot than any other district). The levels of internal consistency were in the acceptable to good ranges in both phases, with the overall PPR score having higher consistency than any of the domain scores in both phases. The correlations between parts of the FFT and VAM scores were almost always positive but also below 0.30 in both phases. The lowest correlations in 2011–2012 improved slightly in 2012–2013. In sum, although FFT scores are overwhelmingly concentrated in the top two performance categories, the positive correlations with VAM suggest that the FFT provides some meaningful differentiation and captures aspects of teacher skills related to student achievement growth.

URLhttps://www.mathematica.org/our-publications-and-findings/publications/measuring-teachers-effectiveness-a-report-from-phase-3-of-pennsylvanias-pilot-of-the-framework
来源智库Mathematica Policy Research (United States)
资源类型智库出版物
条目标识符http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/488068
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Stephen Lipscomb,Jeffrey Terziev,and Duncan Chaplin. Measuring Teachers' Effectiveness: A Report from Phase 3 of Pennsylvania's Pilot of the Framework for Teaching. 2015.
条目包含的文件
文件名称/大小 资源类型 版本类型 开放类型 使用许可
pa_teach_eval_pilot_(482KB)智库出版物 限制开放CC BY-NC-SA浏览
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Stephen Lipscomb]的文章
[Jeffrey Terziev]的文章
[and Duncan Chaplin]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Stephen Lipscomb]的文章
[Jeffrey Terziev]的文章
[and Duncan Chaplin]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Stephen Lipscomb]的文章
[Jeffrey Terziev]的文章
[and Duncan Chaplin]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
文件名: pa_teach_eval_pilot_phase_3.pdf
格式: Adobe PDF
此文件暂不支持浏览

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。