Partnership to Improve Student Achievement€¦ · Beth McGrath and Mercedes McKay. Center for...

Beth McGrath and Mercedes McKayCenter for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education

Partnership to Improve Student Achievement

through Real World Learning in Science, Engineering, Mathematics and Technology

NJ Math-Science PartnershipStevens Institute of Technology Montclair State UniversityBank Street College of Education Liberty Science Center57 Grade 3-5 teachers in 6 urban school districts in Northern New Jersey555 students of MSP teachers

GoalsImprove teachers’ content knowledge in science & engineeringImprove teachers’ pedagogical knowledge in creating & adopting science inquiry & engineering lessonsImprove students’ content knowledge in science & engineering (Grades 3-5)

FocusYear 1: Life Science

2007-08

Environmental Science

Year 2: Earth Science 2008-09 Space Science

Year 3: Physical Science

2009-10

Technological literacy throughout

Program StructureIntensive two-week summer institute3 professional development workshops during the school year Monthly classroom visitsProject website and listserv

Summer Institute ContentScience lessons with focus on scientific inquiryEiE curriculaCIESE Internet-based real time data and telecollaborative projects Faculty presentations, lab tours, workshops & hands-on activities

EiE ModulesDeveloped by the Museum of Science, BostonIntegrate elementary science topics with a specific field of engineeringFeature hands-on activitiesEngage students in the engineering design process

EiE Catching the Wind: Testing a Windmill

Local Geology “Rock Walk”

Science Inquiry Models

Teacher EvaluationPre and post tests for treatment and comparison groupsQuestions taken from NAEP, TIMSS, MOSART & MOS (20 science and 5 engineering questions)

Formative assessments for summer institutesDevelopment and implementation of STEM learning moduleClassroom artifacts

Student EvaluationPre and post tests for treatment and comparison groupsTeacher evaluation of student work

What Causes the Seasons?

EiE Catching the Wind: Designing a Sail

EiE A Sticky Situation: Designing & Building Walls

Year 1 Results (Teachers)Impact on Teacher Content Knowledge in

Science and Engineering

Assessment N Minimum Score

Maximum Score Mean Standard

Deviation Pre-Test 57 12 24 20.47 2.682 Post-Test 56 17 25 22.38 1.805 Increase is statistically significant t(56) = 6.11, p<.001

The mean score of teachers in the treatment group increased by 1.91 points or 7.6 percentage points.

Year 1 Results (Teachers)Analysis of Treatment & Comparison Teachers

Mean Score Change Group Number of

Teachers

Mean Pre Test

Mean Post Test

Score Raw Score

Percentage Points

Standard Error

Treatment 56 20.47 22.38 +1.91 +7.6 .292 Comparison 33 21.12 21.79 +0.67 +2.7 .330 Difference between the groups is statistically significant F(1,88) = 5.973, p=.017

The mean score of the treatment group increased by 7.6 percentage points from pre to post test while the comparison group of teachers gained only 2.7 percentage points on average.

Year 1 Results (Teachers)“The inquiry and engineering design process

are both eye-openers for me, as far as teaching is concerned.”

Nonpublic School Teacher,

Evaluation Report, August 2007.

Successful transfer of learning from the workshops to the classroomIncrease in motivation and attitudes toward science and engineering

Year 1 Results (Students)Analysis of Student Scores, Composite

Mean Score Mean Score Change Group N Pre-test Post-test Raw Score Percentage

Points

Standard Error

Treatment 555 8.34 11.59 3.25 16.3 .122 Comparison 558 8.39 9.61 1.22 6.1 .147 Difference in gains (mean score change) is statistically significant F(1,1112) = 112.9, p<.001 Students of teachers in the treatment group had gains in science and engineering content more than 2.5 times greater

than the students of teachers in the comparison group.

Year 1 Results (Students)Analysis of Student Scores, Science

Mean Score Mean Score Change Group N Pre-test Post-test Raw Score Percentage

Points

Standard Error

Treatment 555 7.11 9.47 2.36 11.8 .119 Comparison 558 7.11 8.11 1.00 6.3 .106 Difference in gains (mean score change) is statistically significant F(1,1112) = 72.80, p<.001

Students of teachers in the treatment group had science achievement gains almost 2 times greater

than the students of teachers in the comparison group.

GPRA ReportingTeachers

No. of teachers receiving MSP PD in science: 57No. of teachers with both pretest and posttest scores in sciencecontent knowledge: 56No. of teachers who showed significant gains in science content knowledge: 43

StudentsNo. of students taught science by MSP teachers: 555No. of students with student assessment data in science: 203No. of students who scored at proficient or above in science: 125

Year 1 Teacher Survey ResultsTeachers view of integrating engineering design process (EDP) in learning science:

EDP motivated their students to learnEDP engaged them in problem solvingStudents were constantly engaged in asking questions, discussing the activity, etc.EDP fostered critical thinking skillsEDP is easy for students to understand and use“Science is now their favorite subject.”

Year 2 FocusEarth & Space (Science & Engineering)Model-based InquiryTeacher’s notion of inquiryClassroom observation protocol- to monitor classroom practices

Year 2 Teacher Science Inquiry Survey Results

Almost 50% of teachers described their classroom to be “somewhat” inquiry-based.There was no correlation between the teachers’years of teaching experience and their ratings of their classrooms as inquiry-based.Majority of teachers felt that they need to change the way they teach to make their classroom more inquiry-based

Teachers’

Impediments to Ideal Science Teaching

Student PopulationStudents of different ability-levelsBehavioral & discipline problemsNot used to scientific inquiryLack of collaborative working skillsSpecial education needsClass sizeLack of parental support

Time & test prep issuesResourcesCurriculum-related challengesPolicy and/or Leadership expectations

Samples of Student Work in Model-based Inquiry

Reasons for Seasons –

Level 0-

No, little, or incorrect understanding

Naïve Model - Student E

Level 1 -

Some understanding. The student can make a diagram/representation but can't explain or has incorrect explanation

Revised Model-Student C

Level 2-

Better understanding. Student can identify the parts of the model but can't make connections (diagram/representation and explanation)

Revised Model- Student A

Level 3-

Accepted Model & Explanation

revised model -

Student Z

Model-based Inquiry ResultsBeginning of the lesson

27 students are at Level 02 students are at Level 1

After the first lesson7 students remained at Level 019 students moved from Level 0 to 11 moved from Level 0 to 21 moved from Level 0 to 32 students remained at Level 1

For More Information

www.stevens.edu/ciese/pisa

Disclaimer

The instructional practices and assessments discussed or shown in this presentation are not intended as an endorsement by the U. S. Department of Education.

Partnership to Improve Student Achievement€¦ · Beth McGrath and Mercedes McKay. Center for...

Documents

Transcript of Partnership to Improve Student Achievement€¦ · Beth McGrath and Mercedes McKay. Center for...

Leading Initiatives to Improve Literacy Skills and Achievement in … · Leading Initiatives to Improve Literacy Skills and Achievement in Elementary Grades Pinellas County Schools

Improve learning achievement in Engineering Metallurgy - Wseas.us

Organizing Schools to Improve Student Achievement: Start ... · PDF fileThe Hamilton Project • Brookings 1 Organizing Schools to Improve Student Achievement: Start Times, Grade Configurations,

Partnership to Improve Children's Health

A few of the Achievement Outcomes for San Francisco Unified School District’s California Math and Science Partnership Grant- Working together to Improve.

Implementing Literacy Programs to Improve Student Achievement · Implementing Literacy Programs to Improve Student Achievement Dean Fixsen National Implementation Research Network

Using P20 Data to Improve Student Achievement:

Latino/a Educational Achievement Partnership - 2015 brochure

Using Learning Analytics to Assess Innovation & Improve Student Achievement

S4 Achievement Counts Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework Partnership 1.

Does Homework Improve Academic Achievement? A Synthesis of ...

Using SMART Goals to Improve Achievement

Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership 2013 IDA Downtown Achievement Award Submission.

DoCharter Schools Improve Student Achievement? Evidence ...Do Charter Schools Improve Student Achievement? Evidence from a National Randomized Study December 2011 Melissa A. Clark,

CAHSEE California High School Exit Exam. Purpose of the CAHSEE Improve student achievement in high school Improve student achievement in high school Help.

Adult Achievement Awards Community-Based Adult Learning ... · National Adult Achievement Awards SCQF Partnership funded local adult achievement awards developed by Community Learning

Logging on to Improve Achievement

RAISING ACHIEVEMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMME

Broad Ripple Magnet High School: Partnering to …...Broad Ripple Magnet High School: Partnering to Improve Student Achievement September 4th, 2013 Partnership at a Glance 2 •We

Promoting educational technology to improve student achievement