1 / 12

OCTEO October 26, 2006

OCTEO October 26, 2006. Reducing the Achievement Gap in Ohio: Implementing OISM to Prepare Graduates of Youngstown State University to Meet the Needs of All Students Phase I. Youngstown State University Beeghly College of Education COMMITTEE MEMBERS Dr. Sylvia J. Imler, PI

aden
Download Presentation

OCTEO October 26, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. OCTEOOctober 26, 2006

  2. Reducing the Achievement Gap in Ohio: Implementing OISM to Prepare Graduates of Youngstown State University to Meet the Needs of All StudentsPhase I Youngstown State University Beeghly College of Education COMMITTEE MEMBERS Dr. Sylvia J. Imler, PI Dr. Kenneth Miller Dr. Marianne Dove Dr. Sally Lewis Mr. Paul Rorhbaugh Mr. Ron Hockman Mrs. Michele DiMuzio Dr. Margaret Briley

  3. ACTION PLAN • Goals • Procedures • Timeline • Target Audience • Outcomes • Evaluation

  4. Goals 1. History and development of OISM. • Development & impact of new educator standards (principal, teachers, PD). • Assess the components of OISM across all licensure programs. 4. Collaborate with RSIT & SERRC partners to identify district needs. 5. Collaborate with RSIT & SERRC to utilize district data to develop action plan.

  5. Goals • Collaborate with district RSIT & SERRC to develop an aligned system • Align OISM for academic and behavior supports with SPAs, accreditation agencies, state standards and the BCOE CF • Present the history and development of OISM to BCOE candidates • IHE faculty & university supervisors (along with NEOSERRC, Lincoln Way, and Columbiana County ESC) will identify potential sites • Identified/purchased library resources needed to integrate OISM 11. Evaluate whether or not goals and objectives were accomplished.

  6. Target Audience • BCOE administrators, full & part-time faculty & support staff • Middle childhood • Early childhood • School counseling • Ed Admin • Administration • Grant team, RSIT, SERRC • Student teacher candidates • Early/Middle Childhood TEC candidates • STEP (Special Teacher Education Program) • Adolescent/Young Adult candidates • School Counseling candidates • Ed Admin Candidates

  7. OUTCOMES • Knowledge of OISM to promote integration of OISM into curricula • OISM statement inclusive in course syllabi • Exhibit model of OISM icon throughout BCOE

  8. Youngstown State University: Reducing the Achievement Gap in Ohio: Implementing OISM to Prepare Graduates of Youngstown State University to Meet the Needs of All Students Dr. Sylvia J. Imler, Principal Investigator

  9. Outcomes continued…. • Understand the impact of new educator standards for teachers, principals & PD at the pre-service level. • Assessment data will inform changes in BCOE policies, curricula and instructional strategies • Identify district needs • Develop an effective OISM plan for candidates and interns to implement. • Revise BCOE program curricula • PD opportunities • Placement at sites • Library resources to implement the six elements of OISM

  10. EVALUATION • *Presentations • Syllabi to insure OISM statement included • *Post OISM graph throughout BCOE • Evaluate college/dept. policies, etc. for evidence of changes based on data and syllabi • Triangulate data findings (RSIT/SERRC/District/YSU OISM grant team) • Alignment of preparation/PD goals • Alignment with SPAs & accrediting agencies • Inclusion of OISM components in TWS & IWS • CT & US evaluation forms of candidates • Library Holdings and make current to implement elements of OISM

  11. BCOE Teacher Candidate Pre and Post Survey Comparison Pretest Posttest Means Means a. I can accurately assess the academic needs of all students 2.95 3.16 b. I can accurately assess the behavioral needs of all students 2.85 3.16 c. I can accurately analyze data on student academic performance 2.99 3.22 d. I can accurately analyze data on student behavior 2.90 3.18 e. I can make effective decisions based on accurate interpretations of data 3.04 3.19 f. I can take necessary steps to insure academic progress for all students 3.06 3.22 g. I can create effective academic interventions based on assessment data 2.95 3.16 h. I can create effective behavioral interventions based on assessment data 2.91 3.16 i. I can implement scientifically-based practices in working with students 2.91 3.16 j. I can effectively engage in collaborative, strategic, planning processes to 3.23 3.33 address student needs Notes: N=262. Responses were made on a Likert-type scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Agree, 4=Strongly Agree

  12. BCOE Faculty Evaluation of BCOE Graduates’ Abilities to Implement the OISM Elements Every graduate of my department is able to: Means Std Dev. a. accurately assess the academic needs of all students 3.00 1.40 b. accurately assess the behavioral needs of all students 2.90 1.30 c. can accurately analyze data on student academic performance 3.10 1.40 d. can accurately analyze data on student behavior 2.90 1.20 e. can make effective decisions based on accurate interpretations of data 3.20 1.20 f. can take necessary steps to insure academic progress for all students 3.00 1.30 g. can create effective academic interventions based on assessment data 2.80 1.10 h. can create effective behavioral interventions based on assessment data 3.10 1.20 i. can implement scientifically-based practices in working with students 3.40 1.20 j. can effectively engage in collaborative, strategic, planning processes to 3.60 1.30 address student needs Notes: N=17. Responses were made on a Likert-type scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neither Disagree or Agree, 4=Agree, 5= Strongly agree (45% completed survey)

More Related