1. No category

*
* RQ 1- Can a model be developed to correctly classify teacher
candidate success on MOGEA?
* RQ 2– Is there a difference in MOGEA scores (by subject area)
between male and female candidates?
* RQ 3– Is there a difference in MOGEA scores (by subject area)
between ethnic groups?
* Sample Size – 1,037
*
*
*Dr. Edmonds’ dissertation based on data from
Missouri teacher preparation programs!
*Thank you for providing it!
*
*
* n=1037
* Total test takers at the time: 4996
* Only n=357 would have provided a significant sample size
*
*
*
*
*
*
What about differences between teacher
candidates when considering gender?
*
* By gender
*
*
*
English LA MoGEA
Subtest Potential
Cut Scores
151 197 209 220 226 231 237 249 254 260
% Possibility this
Difference
Happened by
Chance
*
5% 1% 1% 1% 10% 10% 2% 5% 1%
*
*RQ 1- Can a model be developed to correctly
classify teacher candidate success on MOGEA?
*YES. Gender and race/ethnicity were significant
predictors of MoGEA performance
*RQ 2– Is there a difference in MOGEA scores (by
subject area) between male and female
candidates?
*Yes
*RQ 3– Is there a difference in MOGEA scores (by
subject area) between ethnic groups?
*Yes
*
*Standardized tests used to evaluate prospective
teachers showed significant differences between groups.
* Teacher candidates from racial/ethnic minority groups
were not equally-likely to achieve as their non-minority
peers.
*An achievement gap persists, disproportionately
negatively affecting employment opportunities.
*C-BASE cut scores were never fair for students from
marginalized and underrepresented populations.
*MOGEA has statistically significant differences when
examining ethnicity and gender.
*Edmonds recommends not using MOGEA.
*
18
*Edmonds recommends not using MOGEA as a
screen for teacher candidates in Missouri’s
EPP’s.
*Further research should be conducted about
relationships and differences between and
among groups and by gender for Missouri
Content Assessment (MEGA).
*
19
*
*Question: How can we inform the profession?
*Question: How can we inform the policymakers?
*Question: What should the profession begin to
research in greater depth.
*
*
* Be at the table with policy actors in your setting.
* Asked to speak with Joint Committee on Education
* Asked to present research to MACTE, AACTE
* Asked (with Mike McBride) to present research to California
Colleges for Teacher Education in October, 2015
* Presented “Babies and the Bathwater” to MO Commissioner
Nicastro, DHE, Presidents and Provosts in Nov. 2013.
* Opportunity to give keynote at Universities’ Council of
Education for Education of Teachers in November, 2014. Topic:
“Policy analysis of U.S. educator preparation in 2014: Issues,
trends, and opportunities”
22
*
*What might be an argument used to refute the results?
*Does the general public know, or care?
*Should there be any collective response from Missouri’s
EPPs?
*How do we advocate for our teacher candidates?
*How do we advocate for our profession?
*Will any decisions be made on these recommendations?
*What further research should come from this?
*
*
* Dr. Tim Wall, Associate Professor, Professional Education
* [email protected]
* Dr. Dan Gordon, Department Chair
* [email protected]
* Mike McBride, PEU Assessment Coordinator
* [email protected]
25
* Darling-Hammond, L. (2004). Standards accountability and school
reform. [Electronic version]. Teachers College Record, 106, 10471085. Retrieved May 5, 2008 from
http://www.schoolinfosystem.org/archives/2006/03/standards_acco
u.php
* Edmonds, J. (2014). Missouri General Education Assessment:
examination of teacher candidate scores and predictor variables.
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri,
Columbia.
* Goldhaber, D., Hansen, M., (2010). Race, Gender, and Teacher
Testing: How Informative a Tool Is Teacher Licensure Testing?
[Electronic Version] Retrieved online at
http://www.nctq.org/docs/Race,_gender_and_teacher_licensing.pd
f. Retrieved on 10-17-2013.
* Horn, C. L. (Winter 2003). High-stakes testing and students:
Stopping or perpetuating a cycle of failure? Theory into Practice,
42(1), 30-41.
* Jones, M. G., Jones, B. D., & Hargrove, T. Y. (2003). The unintended
consequences of high-stakes testing. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
* Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the
scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
* Perreault, G. (2000). The classroom
26 impact of high-stress testing.
Education, 120(4), 705-710
* Popham, W. J. (2000). Educational mismeasurement: How high-
stakes testing can harm our children (and what we can do about it.)
National Education Agency. [Electronic version]. Retrieved March 8,
2006 from
http://www.ioxassessment.com/catalog/pdfdownloads/Educational
Mismeasurement.pdf
* Steinberg, J., Weiner, S. (2015). The imperative of educational
preparation programs to improve teacher diversity. Presented at
67th Annual Meeting of the AACTE Atlanta, GA.
* Wakefield, D. (2003). Screening teacher candidates: Problems with
high-stakes testing. Educational Forum, 76(4), 380-388.
* Wall, T. J., Quezada, R., McBride, M. (2015). Babies and the
bathwater: a statistical analysis of the impact of state standardized
examinations on teacher candidate diversity. Presented at 67th
Annual Meeting of the AACTE Atlanta, GA.
* Wall, T. J. (2003), Evaluation of the Impact of Participation in the
T.E.S.T. Examination Preparation Program on Elementary Education
Teacher Candidate C-BASE and Praxis-II Performance. [Electronic
27
version] Retrieved from
https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/560