Matching Items (7)
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
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 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
Smartphones have become increasingly common over the past few years, and mobile games continue to be the most common type of application (Apple, Inc., 2013). For many people, the social aspect of gaming is very important, and thus most mobile games include support for playing with multiple players. However, there is a lack of common knowledge about which implementation of this functionality is most favorable from a development standpoint. In this study, we evaluate three different types of multiplayer gameplay (pass-and-play, Bluetooth, and GameCenter) via development cost and user interviews. We find that pass-and-play, the most easily-implemented mode, is not favored by players due to its inconvenience. We also find that GameCenter is not as well favored as expected due to latency of GameCenter's servers, and that Bluetooth multiplayer is the most well favored for social play due to its similarity to real-life play. Despite there being a large overhead in developing and testing Bluetooth and GameCenter multiplayer due to Apple's development process, this is irrelevant since professional developers must enroll in this process anyway. Therefore, the most effective multiplayer mode to develop is mostly determined by whether Internet play is desirable: Bluetooth if not, GameCenter if so. Future studies involving more complete development work and more types of multiplayer modes could yield more promising results.
ContributorsBradley, Michael Robert (Author) / Collofello, James (Thesis director) / Wilkerson, Kelly (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / Computer Science and Engineering Program (Contributor)
Created2013-12
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