Call Me MISTER

A Program Evaluation of the Call ME MISTER Program at Longwood

University

Daisy HicksPaula Klonowski Leach

Overview

History of Call Me MISTER Literature Review Program Evaluation Questions Methods Data Analysis Discussion Recommendations

History

Increase the number of Black males in the teaching profession

Clemson University (1999) National teacher leadership program for

preparing Black male students for careers in elementary and secondary education

History

Longwood UniversityImplemented in 2007

Region 8 Focus

Lead for the state

Literature Review

Three main topics1. Faulty Pipelines2. Importance of African

American Male Teachers3. Programs to Increase and

Retain African American Male Teachers

Literature Review

Faulty Pipelines6% of the United States’ total K-

12 public school teachers are African American (Norton)

Literature Review

Importance of African American Male Teachers

Hassan (1999) describes a need for African American male teachers because they are better able to connect to African American students since they have familiar styles of communication and are better able to handle the historical, economic, and political factors that affect students’ daily lives

Literature Review

Programs to Increase and Retain African American Male Teachers

K-12 institution initiatives to college teacher preparatory programs.

Program Evaluation Questions

What particular aspects of Call Me MISTER are of most value to its stakeholders?

What impact has Call Me MISTER had on past and current participants and partners?

Methods

Methods

Documents

Surveys

Focus Groups

Data Analysis

60 students have been inducted as MISTERs in Training (MIT) since 2008.

21 are still currently in the program and 8 have graduated.

Seven of the graduates have gained employment in the education filed and one graduate’s employment status was unknown

Data Analysis

Data Analysis

Reasons for MIT Not Continuing in MISTER Program

Data Analysis

Note: 1= Strongly Agree, 2=Agree, 3=Neither Agree or Disagree, 4=Disagree, 5=Strongly Disagree

Being a part of Call Me Mister has made you a better leader.

Call Me MISTER has an effective recruiting program for high school students.

Call Me MISTER has provided opportunities for you that would not have otherwise given you the opportunity to go to college.

If it was not for the Call Me MISTER Program, you would not have considered a career as a K-12 educator.

Call Me MISTER provides the necessary skills to be an effective teacher.

Call Me MISTER has had a positive affect on you.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Student Questions and Mean Response Value

Mean Response Value

Data Analysis

Note: 1= Strongly Agree, 2=Agree, 3=Neither Agree or Disagree, 4=Disagree, 5=Strongly Disagree

Data Analysis

Note: 1= Strongly Agree, 2=Agree, 3=Neither Agree or Disagree, 4=Disagree, 5=Strongly Disagree

DiscussionEvaluation Question One: What particular aspects

of Call Me MISTER are of most value to the stakeholders? The advantages far outweighed the disadvantages

according to participant responses. division personnel, there was not a clear indication

as to one particular aspect that was the most beneficial

students that are currently in the MISTER program ranked the leadership aspect and opportunities that the MISTER program gave them very highly

none of them indicated that it influenced their decision to go into education as a career.

DiscussionEvaluation Question Two: What impact has Call Me MISTER

had on past and current participants and partners? Information gathered from school personnel did not

provide a clear insight into the impact of MISTER on their division.

Current MISTERs in Training had positive responses pertaining to the leadership aspects of the program and the opportunities that Call Me MISTER has provide to them.

The retention data indicates that almost half of the total students to start as a MISTER have continued or graduated the program.

The ones currently in the program all intend to return to their home division and try to find employment when they graduate.

Conclusion Based on the data that was gathered, it is

not evident that there was enough information to fully answer the evaluation questions.

A range of information was collected from a variety of stakeholders but more data needs to be collected to gain a better understanding of how the program is functioning.

Limitations Due to the program director not being easily

accessible it was difficult to adhere to time lines for all aspects of the evaluation.

difficulty setting up a focus group with the current Call Me MISTER Longwood students.

Ideally, more information would have been collected once the evaluators reviewed the initial data that was collected.

It would have been ideal to follow-up with the division personnel as well.

Recommendations

Further evaluation would be useful in targeting how specific activities may play a role in meeting the purpose of the program.

Follow-up with the graduates of the program to determine how they valued Call Me MISTER would also provide useful information about the program.

Given that several of the divisions were not even aware of the Call Me MISTER program, it may be of value to evaluate how effective the recruiting strategies are in meeting the needs of the school divisions.