Impact on P-12 learning and development

Annual Reporting Measure One - Component 4.1

In 2011, the Virginia Department of Education released requirements for teacher evaluation. To meet these requirements, evaluations of educators would have to include measures of student academic progress. The state developed seven standards for evaluating teaching: professional knowledge, instructional planning, instructional delivery, assessment for/of learning, learning environment, professionalism, and student academic progress. The state conducted an alignment analysis of the standards as compared to the InTASC standards and found the Virginia standards to be congruent. Descriptors of these standards were developed along with 4-point behaviorally anchored rubrics to rate effectiveness. In order to demonstrate student academic progress, teachers administer a pre-assessment at the beginning of the year, set progress goals for students, monitor progress throughout the year, and administer a post-assessment to determine attainment of goals. School based evaluators then rate teachers using the rubric to describe student academic progress. We are using the rating on the student academic progress standard to evaluate our graduates’ impact on students’ learning and development.

To collect these data, W&M contacted a school division within Virginia.  The school division agreed to provide these data anonymized and disaggregated.  Using a combination of state and school division supplied data, we obtained the performance reviews for 39 W&M completers. We chose the most recent evaluation from which to obtain data.  Teachers are rated on a scale of one to four on seven performance standards, with a one representing unacceptable and a four representing exemplary.  No completer scored unacceptable in positive impact on student growth.

Standard Average Score Standard Deviation
Student Academic Progress:
The work of the teacher results in acceptable, measurable, and appropriate student academic progress.
3.15 0.43

In addition, we surveyed our graduates and asked their perceptions of their own impact on student learning and development. We administered a survey to 202 program completers. The completers’ names were derived from a list provided by the state of Virginia from the initial teacher preparation programs for the years 2015 through 2020, as well as from a list of alumni that we have developed through outreach efforts. Of these 202 completers, we obtained 62 responses for a response rate of 31%.  Program completers responded on a scale of one to four, with a one indicating No Effect and a four indicating a Significant Effect. Mean ratings from the survey indicate that our graduates perceive that they have a positive effect on academic/scholastic achievement (M =3.56, SD = 0.53), a positive effect on cognitive skills/intellectual development (M=3.44, SD=0.56), a positive effect on social/emotional development (M=3.44, SD=0.63), and a positive effect on psychomotor/physical development (M=3.00, SD =1.27).

Perceived Effect on Student Learning and Development Average Score Standard deviation
Academic/Scholastic Achievement 3.56 0.53
Cognitive Skills/Intellectual Development 3.44 0.56
Social/Emotional Development 3.44 0.63
Psychomotor/Physical Development 3.00 1.27

Responses to these questions have been consistent year on year.  Alumni perception of student impact remains high for academic, cognitive, and social emotional development.  The lower score for psychomotor development is consistent with previous years’ results and represents the diversity of respondent subject areas.  That is, if students are in the higher-grade levels, their impact on psychomotor development will be limited.