Matching Items (12)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Education
- All Subjects: Evaluation
- Status: Published
Description
This study examined the intended and unintended consequences associated with the Education Value-Added Assessment System (EVAAS) as perceived and experienced by teachers in the Houston Independent School District (HISD). To evaluate teacher effectiveness, HISD is using EVAAS for high-stakes consequences more than any other district or state in the country. A large-scale electronic survey was used to investigate the model's reliability and validity; to determine whether teachers used the EVAAS data in formative ways as intended; to gather teachers' opinions on EVAAS's claimed benefits and statements; and to understand the unintended consequences that occurred as a result of EVAAS use in HISD. Mixed methods data collection and analyses were used to present the findings in user-friendly ways, particularly when using the words and experiences of the teachers themselves. Results revealed that the reliability of the EVAAS model produced split and inconsistent results among teacher participants, and teachers indicated that students biased the EVAAS results. The majority of teachers did not report similar EVAAS and principal observation scores, reducing the criterion-related validity of both measures of teacher quality. Teachers revealed discrepancies in the distribution of EVAAS reports, the awareness of trainings offered, and among principals' understanding of EVAAS across the district. This resulted in an underwhelming number of teachers who reportedly used EVAAS data for formative purposes. Teachers disagreed with EVAAS marketing claims, implying the majority did not believe EVAAS worked as intended and promoted. Additionally, many unintended consequences associated with the high-stakes use of EVAAS emerged through teachers' responses, which revealed among others that teachers felt heightened pressure and competition, which reduced morale and collaboration, and encouraged cheating or teaching to the test in attempt to raise EVAAS scores. This study is one of the first to investigate how the EVAAS model works in practice and provides a glimpse of whether value-added models might produce desired outcomes and encourage best teacher practices. This is information of which policymakers, researchers, and districts should be aware and consider when implementing the EVAAS, or any value-added model for teacher evaluation, as many of the reported issues are not specific to the EVAAS model.
ContributorsCollins, Clarin (Author) / Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey (Thesis advisor) / Berliner, David C. (Committee member) / Fischman, Gustavo E (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
Choropleth maps are a common form of online cartographic visualization. They reveal patterns in spatial distributions of a variable by associating colors with data values measured at areal units. Although this capability of pattern revelation has popularized the use of choropleth maps, existing methods for their online delivery are limited in supporting dynamic map generation from large areal data. This limitation has become increasingly problematic in online choropleth mapping as access to small area statistics, such as high-resolution census data and real-time aggregates of geospatial data streams, has never been easier due to advances in geospatial web technologies. The current literature shows that the challenge of large areal data can be mitigated through tiled maps where pre-processed map data are hierarchically partitioned into tiny rectangular images or map chunks for efficient data transmission. Various approaches have emerged lately to enable this tile-based choropleth mapping, yet little empirical evidence exists on their ability to handle spatial data with large numbers of areal units, thus complicating technical decision making in the development of online choropleth mapping applications. To fill this knowledge gap, this dissertation study conducts a scalability evaluation of three tile-based methods discussed in the literature: raster, scalable vector graphics (SVG), and HTML5 Canvas. For the evaluation, the study develops two test applications, generates map tiles from five different boundaries of the United States, and measures the response times of the applications under multiple test operations. While specific to the experimental setups of the study, the evaluation results show that the raster method scales better across various types of user interaction than the other methods. Empirical evidence also points to the superior scalability of Canvas to SVG in dynamic rendering of vector tiles, but not necessarily for partial updates of the tiles. These findings indicate that the raster method is better suited for dynamic choropleth rendering from large areal data, while Canvas would be more suitable than SVG when such rendering frequently involves complete updates of vector shapes.
ContributorsHwang, Myunghwa (Author) / Anselin, Luc (Thesis advisor) / Rey, Sergio J. (Committee member) / Wentz, Elizabeth (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
ABSTRACT Education policymakers at the national level have initiated reforms in K-12 education for that past several years that have focused on teacher quality and teacher evaluation. More recently, reforms have included legislation that focuses on administrator quality as well. Included in far-reaching recent legislation in Arizona is a requirement that administrators be evaluated on a standards-based evaluation system that is linked to student outcomes. The end result is an annual summative measure of administrator effectiveness that impacts job retention. Because of this, Arizona administrators have become concerned about rapidly becoming proficient in the new evaluation systems. Administrators rarely have the explicit professional development opportunities they need to collaborate on a shared understanding of these new evaluation systems. This action research study focused on a group of eight administrators in a small urban district grappling with a new, complex, and high-stakes administrator evaluation that is a component of an all-encompassing Teacher Incentive Fund Grant. An existing professional learning time was engaged to assist administrators in lessening their concerns and increasing their understanding and use of the evaluation instrument. Activities were designed to engage the administrators in dynamic, contextualized learning. Participants interacted in a group to interpret the meaning of the evaluation instrument share practical knowledge and support each other's acquisition understanding. Data were gathered with mixed methods. Administrators were given pre-and post-surveys prior to and immediately after this six-week innovation. Formal and informal interviews were conduct throughout the innovation. Additionally, detailed records in the form of meeting records and a researcher journal were kept. Qualitative and quantitative data were triangulated to validate findings. Results identified concerns and understanding of administrators as they attempted to come to a shared understanding of the new evaluation instrument. As a result of learning together, their concerns about the use of the instrument lessened. Other concerns however, remained or increased. Administrators found the process of the Administrator Learning Community valuable and felt their understanding and use of the instrument had increased. Intense concerns about the competing priorities and initiatives led to the administrators to consider a reevaluation of the competing initiatives. Implications from this study can be used to help other administrators and professional development facilitators grappling with common concerns.
ContributorsEsmont, Leah W (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Thesis advisor) / McNeil, David (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
ABSTRACT
This study examines validity evidence of a state policy-directed teacher evaluation system implemented in Arizona during school year 2012-2013. The purpose was to evaluate the warrant for making high stakes, consequential judgments of teacher competence based on value-added (VAM) estimates of instructional impact and observations of professional practice (PP). The research also explores educator influence (voice) in evaluation design and the role information brokers have in local decision making. Findings are situated in an evidentiary and policy context at both the LEA and state policy levels.
The study employs a single-phase, concurrent, mixed-methods research design triangulating multiple sources of qualitative and quantitative evidence onto a single (unified) validation construct: Teacher Instructional Quality. It focuses on assessing the characteristics of metrics used to construct quantitative ratings of instructional competence and the alignment of stakeholder perspectives to facets implicit in the evaluation framework. Validity examinations include assembly of criterion, content, reliability, consequential and construct articulation evidences. Perceptual perspectives were obtained from teachers, principals, district leadership, and state policy decision makers. Data for this study came from a large suburban public school district in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona.
Study findings suggest that the evaluation framework is insufficient for supporting high stakes, consequential inferences of teacher instructional quality. This is based, in part on the following: (1) Weak associations between VAM and PP metrics; (2) Unstable VAM measures across time and between tested content areas; (3) Less than adequate scale reliabilities; (4) Lack of coherence between theorized and empirical PP factor structures; (5) Omission/underrepresentation of important instructional attributes/effects; (6) Stakeholder concerns over rater consistency, bias, and the inability of test scores to adequately represent instructional competence; (7) Negative sentiments regarding the system's ability to improve instructional competence and/or student learning; (8) Concerns regarding unintended consequences including increased stress, lower morale, harm to professional identity, and restricted learning opportunities; and (9) The general lack of empowerment and educator exclusion from the decision making process. Study findings also highlight the value of information brokers in policy decision making and the importance of having access to unbiased empirical information during the design and implementation phases of important change initiatives.
This study examines validity evidence of a state policy-directed teacher evaluation system implemented in Arizona during school year 2012-2013. The purpose was to evaluate the warrant for making high stakes, consequential judgments of teacher competence based on value-added (VAM) estimates of instructional impact and observations of professional practice (PP). The research also explores educator influence (voice) in evaluation design and the role information brokers have in local decision making. Findings are situated in an evidentiary and policy context at both the LEA and state policy levels.
The study employs a single-phase, concurrent, mixed-methods research design triangulating multiple sources of qualitative and quantitative evidence onto a single (unified) validation construct: Teacher Instructional Quality. It focuses on assessing the characteristics of metrics used to construct quantitative ratings of instructional competence and the alignment of stakeholder perspectives to facets implicit in the evaluation framework. Validity examinations include assembly of criterion, content, reliability, consequential and construct articulation evidences. Perceptual perspectives were obtained from teachers, principals, district leadership, and state policy decision makers. Data for this study came from a large suburban public school district in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona.
Study findings suggest that the evaluation framework is insufficient for supporting high stakes, consequential inferences of teacher instructional quality. This is based, in part on the following: (1) Weak associations between VAM and PP metrics; (2) Unstable VAM measures across time and between tested content areas; (3) Less than adequate scale reliabilities; (4) Lack of coherence between theorized and empirical PP factor structures; (5) Omission/underrepresentation of important instructional attributes/effects; (6) Stakeholder concerns over rater consistency, bias, and the inability of test scores to adequately represent instructional competence; (7) Negative sentiments regarding the system's ability to improve instructional competence and/or student learning; (8) Concerns regarding unintended consequences including increased stress, lower morale, harm to professional identity, and restricted learning opportunities; and (9) The general lack of empowerment and educator exclusion from the decision making process. Study findings also highlight the value of information brokers in policy decision making and the importance of having access to unbiased empirical information during the design and implementation phases of important change initiatives.
ContributorsSloat, Edward F. (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Committee member) / Shough, Lori (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
This mixed methods participatory action research study explored how an instructional coach influenced a state mandated curriculum adoption at a Title 1 urban middle school. The purpose of this study was to identify ways in which an instructional coach supported a veteran staff during the adoption of new curriculum standards. The instructional coach/action researcher employed a three pronged coaching approach that incorporated individual and team coaching sessions and increased networking to encourage and support the development of social capital. This study was informed using Vygotsky's Social Learning Theory, Wenger's Communities of Practice, Coleman's Social Capital Theory, and Hall and Horde's Concerns-Based Adoption Model. The study is heavily weighted in favor of qualitative data which includes participant reflections, coach individual session and team session reflections, field-notes, team meeting videos, and exit interviews. Several themes emerged supporting the use of a differentiated coaching approach, the promotion of social capital, and the identification of initiative overload as a barrier to curriculum adoption. The quantitative data analysis, pre and post study Stages of Concern Questionnaires, produced evidence that participants experienced minor shifts in their concerns relating to the adoption of Common Core State Standards. Results were used to inform coaching decisions based on individual participant needs as well as to augment the qualitative findings. Ideas for further research are discussed.
ContributorsSchwarting, Joann (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Thesis advisor) / Johnson, Lynda (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
Description
This action research project explores masters level graduate student writing and academic identity during one semester in an interdisciplinary masters program. Informing this study is a two part theoretical framework including the Academic Literacy Model (Lea and Street) and Wenger's concept of identity. The purpose of this exploration was to understand how first semester graduate students experienced academic writing and what characteristics of their academic identity emerged. A mixed-methods approach was used to collect both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data included results from the Inventory of Processes in Graduate Writing (Lavelle and Bushrow, 2007) and the Graduate Student Identity Survey. Qualitative data was collected through researcher observations, student blog entries, writing group transcripts, and individual interviews. The following themes emerge from the data: a) graduate students attribute their successes in writing to previous experiences, b) graduate students experience struggles related primarily to academic quality and faculty expectations, c) graduate students negotiate ways of being in the academy through figuring out expectations of faculty and program, d) work done in the writing group meetings shows evidence of meaning-making for the graduate students, e) the focus of the MA program was critically important to graduate students in the graduate writing project, e) participants' role as graduate students felt most strongly in contexts that include academic activity, and f) students acknowledge change and increasingly identify themselves as writers. Ideas for future cycles of research are discussed.
ContributorsRuggles, Tosha M (Author) / Wetzel, Keith (Thesis advisor) / Ewbank, Ann (Committee member) / Friedrich, Patricia (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
This mixed-methods study explored perceptions of new adjuncts on various trainings with regards to satisfying their professional and aspirational needs. Three trainings were offered in fall 2018 quarter as optional professional development: workshop, and two roundtable sessions. These trainings assisted adjuncts with their teaching skills, educational technology and pedagogy. Guidance was provided from experienced adjuncts and staff.
Surveys and interviews with adjuncts, along with a focus group with staff were the sources of data for this study. A repeated measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model was utilized. Analysis of data showed that there was a positive and statistical significance of change in perceptions of adjuncts who participated in all trainings towards fulfilling their needs, as compared to those who did not participate in any trainings. Adjuncts perceived an improvement in their professional growth based on Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory and the trainings also fulfilled their higher-level growth needs based on Maslow’s hierarchical needs theory. A large practical significance was also found which measures the practical impact of such trainings at local communities of practice.
Surveys and interviews with adjuncts, along with a focus group with staff were the sources of data for this study. A repeated measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) model was utilized. Analysis of data showed that there was a positive and statistical significance of change in perceptions of adjuncts who participated in all trainings towards fulfilling their needs, as compared to those who did not participate in any trainings. Adjuncts perceived an improvement in their professional growth based on Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory and the trainings also fulfilled their higher-level growth needs based on Maslow’s hierarchical needs theory. A large practical significance was also found which measures the practical impact of such trainings at local communities of practice.
ContributorsSreekaram, Siddhartha (Author) / Marsh, Josephine (Thesis advisor) / Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey (Committee member) / Kim, Jeongeun (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
There is a serious need for early childhood intervention practices for children who are living at or below the poverty line. Since 1965 Head Start has provided a federally funded, free preschool program for children in this population. The City of Phoenix Head Start program consists of nine delegate agencies, seven of which reside in school districts. These agencies are currently not conducting local longitudinal evaluations of their preschool graduates. The purpose of this study was to recommend initial steps the City of Phoenix grantee and the delegate agencies can take to begin a longitudinal evaluation process of their Head Start programs. Seven City of Phoenix Head Start agency directors were interviewed. These interviews provided information about the attitudes of the directors when considering longitudinal evaluations and how Head Start already evaluates their programs through internal assessments. The researcher also took notes on the Third Grade Follow-Up to the Head Start Executive Summary in order to make recommendations to the City of Phoenix Head Start programs about the best practices for longitudinal student evaluations.
ContributorsArmfield, Jessica Ann (Author) / Duggan, Mary Anne (Thesis director) / Dumka, Larry (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor)
Created2014-05
Description
In 2010, the Arizona Legislature established a performance-based diploma initiative known as Move On When Ready (MOWR). The policy relies on an education model designed to evaluate students' college and career readiness by measuring their academic ability to succeed in the first credit-bearing course in community college. Move On When Ready is a structurally oriented, qualification system that attempts to attain a relatively narrow goal: increase the number of students able to successfully perform at a college-level academic standard. By relying on a set of benchmarked assessments to measure success and failure, MOWR propagates a categorical binary. The binary establishes explicit performance criteria on a set of examinations students are required to meet in order to earn a high school qualification that, by design, certifies whether students are ready or not ready for college.
This study sought to reveal how students’ perceptions of the policy and schooling in general affect their understanding of the concept of college readiness and the college readiness binary and to identify factors that help formulate those perceptions. This interpretivist, qualitative study relied on analysis of multiple face-to-face interviews with students to better understand how they think and act within the context of Move On When Ready, paying particular attention to students from historically vulnerable minority subgroups (e.g., the Latina (a)/Hispanic sub-population) enrolled in two schools deploying the MOWR strategy.
Findings suggest that interviewed students understand little about MOWR's design, intent or implications for their future educational trajectories. Moreover, what they believe is generally misinformed, regardless of aspiration, socio-cultural background, or academic standing. School-based sources of messaging (e.g., teachers and administrators) supply the bulk of information to students about MOWR. However, in these two schools, the flow of information is constricted. In addition, the information conveyed is either distorted by message mediators or misinterpreted by the students. The data reveal that formal and informal mediators of policy messages influence students’ engagement with the policy and affect students’ capacity to play an active role in determining the policy’s effect on their educational outcomes.
This study sought to reveal how students’ perceptions of the policy and schooling in general affect their understanding of the concept of college readiness and the college readiness binary and to identify factors that help formulate those perceptions. This interpretivist, qualitative study relied on analysis of multiple face-to-face interviews with students to better understand how they think and act within the context of Move On When Ready, paying particular attention to students from historically vulnerable minority subgroups (e.g., the Latina (a)/Hispanic sub-population) enrolled in two schools deploying the MOWR strategy.
Findings suggest that interviewed students understand little about MOWR's design, intent or implications for their future educational trajectories. Moreover, what they believe is generally misinformed, regardless of aspiration, socio-cultural background, or academic standing. School-based sources of messaging (e.g., teachers and administrators) supply the bulk of information to students about MOWR. However, in these two schools, the flow of information is constricted. In addition, the information conveyed is either distorted by message mediators or misinterpreted by the students. The data reveal that formal and informal mediators of policy messages influence students’ engagement with the policy and affect students’ capacity to play an active role in determining the policy’s effect on their educational outcomes.
ContributorsSilver, Michael Greg (Author) / Berliner, David C. (Thesis advisor) / Fischman, Gustavo (Committee member) / Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
In this mixed-methods study, I sought to design and develop a test delivery method to reduce linguistic bias in English-based mathematics tests. Guided by translanguaging, a recent linguistic theory recognizing the complexity of multilingualism, I designed a computer-based test delivery method allowing test-takers to toggle between English and their self-identified dominant language. This three-part study asks and answers research questions from all phases of the novel test delivery design. In the first phase, I conducted cognitive interviews with 11 Mandarin Chinese dominant speakers and 11 Spanish speaking dominant undergraduate students while taking a well-regarded calculus conceptual exam, the Precalculus Concept Assessment (PCA). In the second phase, I designed and developed the linguistically adaptive test (LAT) version of the PCA using the Concerto test delivery platform. In the third phase, I conducted a within-subjects random-assignment study of the efficacy the LAT. I also conducted in-depth interviews with a subset of the test-takers.
Nine items on the PCA revealed linguistic issues during the cognitive interviews demonstrating the need to improve the linguistic bias on the test items. Additionally, the newly developed LAT demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity. However, the large-scale efficacy study showed that the LAT did not appear to make a significant difference in scores for dominant speakers of Spanish or dominant speakers of Mandarin Chinese. This finding held true for overall test scores as well as at the item level indicating that the LAT test delivery system does not appear to reduce linguistic bias in testing.
Additionally, in-depth interviews revealed that many students felt that the linguistically adaptive test was either the same or essentially the same as the non-LAT version of the test. Some participants felt that the toggle button was not necessary if they could understand the mathematics item well enough. As one participant noted, “It's math, It's math. It doesn't matter if it's in English or in Spanish.” This dissertation concludes with a discussion about the implications for test developers and suggestions for future direction of study.
ContributorsClose, Kevin (Author) / Zheng, Yi (Thesis advisor) / Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey (Thesis advisor) / Anderson, Kate (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021