1 / 14

Missouri Reading Initiative

Missouri Reading Initiative. Spring 2005 Survey Results. Introduction. The following slides present the responses to a selected set of questions taken from the 2005 Missouri Reading Initiative Annual Participant Survey.

devon
Download Presentation

Missouri Reading Initiative

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. Missouri Reading Initiative Spring 2005 Survey Results

  2. Introduction The following slides present the responses to a selected set of questions taken from the 2005Missouri Reading InitiativeAnnual Participant Survey. The 2005 Survey was the fourth implementation of the questionnaire that asks about program component usage, participant support, trainer performance, and more. In this report the average responses from all respondents in 2005 are compared to previous years’ results. Readers should note that 2005 was the first year that respondents from Grades 4-6 were queried, as this was the first full year the MRI program was offered for those grades.

  3. Introduction While survey responses are “self-reported” results, we would argue this information has power in that it is a summary of the testimony of the people who are in the best position to judge the value of a professional development activity: namely, teachers and administrators in schools. For those readers who are interested, more extensive reporting of process and outcome evaluation activities can be found by following the “Program Evaluation” link at :http://missourireadinginitiative.com/

  4. K = 80 1st = 93 2nd = 97 3rd = 102 4th = 42 5th = 55 6th = 38 Reading = 17 Special Ed. = 31 Title I = 29 Administrators = 17 Other = 21 2005 Sample = 622 respondents from 43 schools1st 325 (22) 2nd 58 (5) 3rd 239 (16)

  5. Years Teaching: Years at School: K 10.7 7.9 1st 10.3 7.3 2nd 13.4 10.0 3rd 11.3 8.7 Reading 14.6 6.7 Sp. Ed. 13.5 8.3 Title I 15.0 10.1 Admin. 21.9 9.3 2005 Sample Profile:Length of Service

  6. In the following tables the participant responses are organized in two different ways: • By the position/grade level of the respondent • By MRI Year: MRI is a three year program so schools will be either in their 1st, 2nd, or 3rd year.

  7. Has MRI changed or reinforced your teaching?On a scale of 1 (Not at All) to 5 (A Great Deal)By Position/Grade

  8. Has MRI changed or reinforced your teaching?On a scale of 1 (Not at All) to 5 (A Great Deal)By MRI Year

  9. Parental Involvement/QuantityHas the number of parents involved with your class increased?On a Scale of 1 (Not at All) to 5 (A Great Deal)

  10. Parental Involvement/QualityHas the quality of parental involvement improved? (e.g., more precise information)On a Scale of 1 (Not at All) to 5 (A Great Deal)

  11. Are students reading and writing better?On a scale of 1 (Not at All) to 5 (A Great Deal)By Position/Grade

  12. Are students reading and writing better?On a scale of 1 (Not at All) to 5 (A Great Deal)By MRI Year

  13. Reflecting on the effectiveness of the MRI program as a whole, how would you rate it? On a scale of 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent)By Position/Grade

  14. Reflecting on the effectiveness of the MRI program as a whole, how would you rate it? On a scale of 1 (Poor) to 5 (Excellent)By MRI Year

More Related