Idaho Economic Fellows Institute:
Preparing Economic Educators for a New Era
Paper presented at
NCEE/NAEE 2001 Annual Conference
Chicago, Illinois
October 27, 2001
Philip P. Kelly, Ph.D.
Scott Willison, Ph.D.
Mo Hall
Boise State University
College of Education
1910 University Drive
Boise, ID 83725
pkelly@boisestate.edu
swillis@boisestate.edu
Introduction
The call for reform in public education has been coupled
with calls for reform in teacher preparation.
In the current era of standards and high stakes testing, teachers’
knowledge, skills and dispositions continue to be seen as a critical factor in
student learning. The 1996 report What
Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future
(National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future) reiterates that
teaching and quality teacher preparation are crucial for successful school
reform. Hermanowicz, (1991) in reviewing
recommendations for reform in the
context of economics education states that “It is unconscionable,…,to continue,
without correction, programs and practices that produce teachers who themselves
have insufficient knowledge in economics” (p. 78). Reforming the process for educating
pre-service teachers is just one concern.
There is also a need to study and test new models of professional
development for experienced teachers. As
a result of the work of the National Council on Economic Education (NCEE) and
its partnerships with universities, corporations, foundations and professional
associations, economics educators and teacher educators are in a position to
rethink the ways in which teachers learn economics and economics pedagogy. The NCEE partnerships have spawned 49 state
economics councils and 275 University Centers for Economic Education providing
professional development opportunities for teachers. It is in the context of
university centers exploring and validating new teacher education models that
this article is written.
This
study examines the effectiveness of a three-year Masters of Economics Education
program sponsored by Idaho’s Council for Economic Education and developed and
delivered through an interdisciplinary partnership between Boise State
University’s College of Business and College of Education. This study was designed to provide formative
assessment of the program so that professors and program developers could
adjust the curriculum as necessary, to identify the program’s impact on
participating teachers’ (called fellows) economic literacy and pedagogy and to
determine if the program of study impacted participants’ k-12 students economic
understanding.
Background
A review of economics education
literature indicates that the amount of economics coursework that a teacher has
can impact students’ economic knowledge. Walstad and Soper (1988A) find a positive and significant
impact of teacher course work on the performance of students on the Test of
Economic Literacy (TEL). Furthermore, Lynch (1990) reports that “Not only do
students learn more when their teachers have more training, but economics
students whose teachers have had few courses may not learn any macro economics
or international economics” (p.
295). The program described herein was
designed to more properly equip teachers of economics and social studies to
adequately develop the economic literacy of Idaho’s K-12 students.
Allgood and Walstad (1999) studied
practicing teachers enrolled in an innovative three-summer graduate program in
economic education at the University of Nebraska and found that the
participants gained in economic understanding, thought more like economists
than traditional social studies teachers and that the participants’ economic
understanding influenced positively student learning of economics. While the authors conclude by noting
“the results suggest that intensive and lengthy instruction in economics for
teachers has a long-term payoff in economic understanding for both teachers and
students” (p. 109), their measure of improved economic understanding was
limited to 232 students in 12 teachers’ classes in only one semester. This study described herein more thoroughly
documents these effects by tracking changes in student economic literacy over a
three-year period.
For
an Idaho teacher to be certified in Social Studies, the most common
certification in the state for Economics teachers, Idaho requires two
university courses in economics content.
In looking at how Idaho Economics teachers are educated, Jenkins and
Nelson (2000) surveyed 368 Idaho educators to determine the preferred types of
teacher training and the methodology used in economic education programs. Graduate university courses were rated as the
most useful type of training for the integration of economics into the K-12 curriculum. The authors conclude that there needs to be
increased opportunities in Idaho for economics education, as well as a
continuing effort to develop hands-on and engaging instructional strategies.
Idaho Economic Fellows
Institute
The
Idaho Economic Fellows Institute is being conducted at Boise State University
from the summer of 1999 through the spring of 2002. The Institute is modeled after a similar one
conducted at the University of Nebraska 1993-1996. (Allgood and Walstad, 1999). The Idaho Institute offered fellows 30
semester hours of graduate credit courses in three six-week summer sessions.
The fellows also earned nine hours of independent study credits during the
school years, which gave fellows the opportunity to develop curriculum units
and engage in action research within their own classrooms. In each of the summers, fellows were enrolled
in two credits of education pedagogy course work and six credits of economics
course work. During the first summer,
fellows took course work in macroeconomics, microeconomics, and instructional
theory. In the second summer, fellows
completed course work in financial markets, industrial organization, and
instructional and assessment practices.
During the third summer, they took a course focusing on international
economics and a course co-taught by education and economics professors that
examined fellows’ instructional strategies for teaching economic analysis. While the master’s degree was
interdisciplinary in nature, at the completion of their theses, students will
receive a Master of Arts in economics from the College of Business.
During
summer course work, fellows resided in university housing and participated in
informal and organized social events. To counter what Goodlad (1990) described
as “the social, intellectual, professional isolation of teachers (which) begins
in teacher education” (p.11), institute organizers were deliberate in
developing a cohort atmosphere that allowed fellows to support each other to
the extent that communication about professional matters between the fellows
would continue beyond their participation in the institute.
Of
the 35 teachers enrolled in the program 31 are currently enrolled in the final
academic year of the institute.
Twenty-five fellows are secondary economics teachers, four are jr. high
or middle school teachers and two teach in elementary schools. Twenty-one of the fellows have less than ten
years experience, while 8 have ten or more years. The prior economics education of the fellows
varied widely from no courses to a bachelor’s degree including 9 economics
classes (see Chart 1).
CHART 1 Number of Economics
Courses Prior to Enrollment
The evaluation of the Idaho Economic Fellows Institute was conducted in an iterative fashion during its three years of operation. Because the purpose of this evaluation was to provide formative feedback to program providers as well as to conduct a summative evaluation of the impact on participant and K-12 student learning, multiple data sources were pursued to document each of the following:
v development of economic literacy among the fellows,
v development of economic literacy among fellows’ K-12 students,
v pedagogical repertoire of the fellows, and
v overall quality of Idaho Economic Fellows Institute.
Each of the above items will be addressed and explained in detail in the following sections.
To measure the economic literacy of the fellows, we administered Form A of the Test of Understanding in College Economics (TUCE) four times over the three years of the Institute. The TUCE is comprised of two 33-item selected response assessments, one each for microeconomics and macroeconomics. The TUCE sufficiently measured the wide range of abilities within the fellow population, allowing us to measure differing levels of student growth. Similarly, Walstad (1984) and Allgood & Walstad (1999) report its validity when used in similar manners to this study.
Fellows’
mean scores on the macroeconomics TUCE increased during each of the follow-up
years. Although the improvement over last year was not statistically
significant, t(29) = 0.88, ns (one-tailed), the overall improvement of
scores was significant t(29) = 5.97, p < 0.001. Of more relevant use to practitioners, may be
the overall effect size (ES) of 0.92, which indicates that the average fellow
now scores almost one standard deviation higher than at his entrance to the
Institute. When using the TUCE national
norms, the mean normed percentile score of the fellows increased 34 percentiles
from the 47th to the 81st percentile.
TABLE 1 Macroeconomics TUCE Scores of
IEFI participants
|
Year |
N |
Mean (33 items) |
S Dev |
Percentile |
t test |
Sig |
ES |
|
1999 (Yr 1) |
29 |
14.00 |
6.41 |
47th |
----- |
----- |
----- |
|
2000 (Yr 2) |
30 |
19.17 |
5.75 |
78th |
7.12 (Yr 1-2) |
p<0.001 |
0.79 |
|
2001 (Yr 3) |
31 |
19.97 |
6.00 |
81st |
0.88 (Yr 2-3) |
nonsig |
0.12 |
|
Total Change |
29 |
----- |
----- |
----- |
5.97 (Yr 1-3) |
p<0.001 |
0.92 |
Fellows’
mean scores on the microeconomics TUCE also increased during each of the
follow-up years. Their last scores were
significantly higher than the previous year, t(29) = 2.000, p
< 0.05 (one-tailed). Their overall improvement
of scores was also significant t(29) = 5.51, p < 0.001. The overall effect
size (ES) of 0.69 indicates that the average fellow now scores significantly
higher than at his entrance to the Institute.
When using the TUCE national norms, the mean normed percentile score of
the fellows increased 19 percentiles from the 54th to the 73rd
percentile.
TABLE 2
Microeconomics TUCE Scores of IEFI participants
|
Year |
N |
Mean (33 items) |
S Dev |
Percentile |
t test |
Sig |
ES |
|
1999 (Yr 1) |
29 |
17.00 |
5.61 |
54th |
----- |
----- |
----- |
|
2000 (Yr 2) |
30 |
19.60 |
5.38 |
67th |
4.77 (Yr 1-2) |
p<0.001 |
0.42 |
|
2001 (Yr 3) |
31 |
20.97 |
5.02 |
73rd |
2.00 (Yr 2-3) |
p<0.05 |
0.25 |
|
Total Change |
29 |
----- |
----- |
----- |
5.51 (Yr 1-3) |
p<0.001 |
0.69 |
As one can expect, fellows’ prior economic training (as measured by classes taken) had a strong correlation on their initial performance on the TUCE tests (See Table 3). Participation in the institute, however, weakened this correlation significantly. Specifically, when examining each of the TUCE exams, micro- and macroeconomics, we find an interesting phenomenon. While the correlation (r = 0.686) of prior coursework in economics was strongest for the macroeconomics pretest, the correlation (0.257) of the 2001 scores was non-significant. When examining the correlations for microeconomics, one notices that while the correlation across the two years remains significant, it does weaken. Further study is required to more definitively explain the differential effect of the institute on fellows’ scores.
|
|
Correlation (r) |
t test |
Sig |
|
Macroeconomics 99 |
0.686 |
5.08 |
p<0.01 |
|
Macroeconomics 01 |
0.257 |
1.44 |
nonsig |
|
Microeconomics 99 |
0.646 |
4.55 |
p<0.01 |
|
Microeconomics 01 |
0.518 |
3.26 |
p<0.01 |
To measure the economic literacy of the fellows’ students in grades 5-12,
we used grade level appropriate corollaries to the TUCE. These assessments included the Test of
Economic Literacy (TEL) for grades 10-12, the Test of Economic Knowledge (TEK)
for grades 7-9, and the Basic Economics Test (BET) for grades 5 and 6. All test forms were normed and published by
the National Council on Economic Education.
Unfortunately, data from the third year of participation is
limited. A complete fourth round of data
will be collected in spring 2002. Because each test has a different number of
items, for the purpose of brevity, we will report here the nationally normed
percentile scores for each.
|
Year |
N |
Mean (46 items) |
S Dev |
Percentile |
z score |
Sig |
ES |
|
1 (98/99) |
1058 |
19.67 |
5.90 |
48th |
----- |
----- |
----- |
|
2 (99/00) |
812 |
22.69 |
6.97 |
59th |
5.18 (Yr 1-2) |
p<0.001 |
0.31 |
|
3 (00/01) |
417 |
24.95 |
6.57 |
67th |
4.59 (Yr 2-3) |
p<0.001 |
0.33 |
|
Total Change |
29 |
----- |
----- |
----- |
9.79 (Yr 1-3) |
p<0.001 |
0.70 |
|
Year |
N |
Mean (39 items) |
S Dev |
Percentile |
z score |
Sig |
ES |
|
1 (98/99) |
159 |
17.23 |
5.25 |
53rd |
----- |
----- |
----- |
|
2 (99/00) |
358 |
17.67 |
6.58 |
55th |
0.81 (Yr 1-2) |
nonsig |
0.10 |
|
Year |
N |
Mean (29 items) |
S Dev |
Percentile |
z score |
Sig |
ES |
|
1 (98/99) |
45 |
14.49 |
4.72 |
38th |
----- |
----- |
----- |
|
2 (99/00) |
45 |
16.84 |
4.28 |
53rd |
2.45 (Yr 1-2) |
p<0.01 |
0.52 |
Table 4 clearly demonstrates the improvement in economic literacy among the high school students of the Idaho fellows. The growth of 19 percentiles over two years yields and effect size of 0.70. At the elementary level, it appears that students are learning more, but the small sample size limits our ability to make strong claims regarding the significance of their growth. The middle school students demonstrate little, if any growth. Once again, the small sample size limits our ability to make any firm conclusions regarding their achievement, or lack thereof.
To assess the pedagogical repertoire of the fellows, we administered
two instruments. The first is a series of
Comfort Surveys, in which teachers report their comfort with various concepts
and skills in both economics and pedagogy.
The fellows reported comfort on a 4-point Lichert scale; very
comfortable, comfortable, uncomfortable, and very uncomfortable. The second is a Change in Practice Survey
through which fellows report the impact of their participation in the Institute
on treatment of economic principles in their classrooms. Fellows indicated whether economic concepts
were newly added to their classroom curriculum, their treatment of specific
economic concepts was enhanced, or their practice was unchanged as a result of
their participation in the Institute.
Comfort Surveys
The economic fellows’ program participants completed
comfort surveys immediately before each summer institute and again two months
after their summer sessions. Curriculum
goals as stated in course syllabi were used to develop the comfort
surveys. Prior to the beginning of each
summer session professors validated the list of concepts identified in their
course. The 1999 comfort pre and post tests measured the teachers in their
level of comfort for macroeconomics concepts, microeconomic concepts, and
pedagogy using a scale of one to four—one being very uncomfortable and four
being very comfortable. Of 34
participants, 33 completed both the pre and post-tests. The 2000 comfort survey reported fellows’
levels of comfort with financial market, intermediate microeconomic,
macroeconomic, and pedagogy concepts. Of 31 participants, 26 completed both the
pre and post-tests. The 2001 comfort
surveys examined fellows’ comfort with international economics, economic
conditions and analysis, and educational research.
To check the reliability of each of the sub-tests in the comfort
surveys, a Cronbach Alpha test was used to check for internal consistency based
on the average inter-item correlation.
The reliability analysis for all six administrations of the comfort
surveys over three years demonstrates that all instruments were reliable. The Cronbach Alpha values ranged from 0.79 to
0.98, with a mean value of 0.92. Thus, the individual items as a whole had
relevant information and a high degree of internal consistency on the three
comfort sub-tests for each administration for all three years.
|
Sub-tests |
N
|
Mean
(pre) |
Alpha
(pre) |
Mean
(post) |
Alpha (post) |
t score
|
Sig
|
ES
|
|
Macroeconomics |
33 |
66.39 |
0.98 |
86.65 |
0.94 |
8.45 |
p<0.001 |
1.53 |
|
Microeconomics |
33 |
114.03 |
0.97 |
140.06 |
0.97 |
8.17 |
p<0.001 |
1.50 |
|
Pedagogy |
33 |
73.94 |
0.92 |
78.68 |
0.88 |
2.86 |
p<0.01 |
0.55 |
|
Sub-tests |
N
|
Mean
(pre) |
Alpha
(pre) |
Mean
(post) |
Alpha (post) |
t score
|
Sig
|
ES
|
|
Financial Markets |
31 |
61.77 |
0.96 |
92.87 |
0.97 |
14.99 |
p<0.001 |
2.27 |
|
Industrial
Organizations |
31 |
54.26 |
0.95 |
69.55 |
0.95 |
8.60 |
p<0.001 |
1.65 |
|
Pedagogy |
31 |
34.87 |
0.79 |
41.23 |
0.92 |
6.38 |
p<0.001 |
1.33 |
|
Sub-tests |
N
|
Mean
(pre) |
Alpha
(pre) |
Mean
(post) |
Alpha (post) |
t score
|
Sig
|
ES
|
|
Economic
Cond./Analysis |
27 |
28.78 |
0.89 |
35.85 |
0.81 |
9.42 |
p<0.001 |
1.80 |
|
International
Economics |
27 |
52.63 |
0.97 |
76.63 |
0.95 |
9.57 |
p<0.001 |
2.60 |
|
Pedagogy |
27 |
22.63 |
0.98 |
32.63 |
0.84 |
6.67 |
p<0.001 |
1.71 |
The means of the pre- and post-tests were compared using a paired-samples t-test (see Tables 7-9). The annual pre-post data gathered from the comfort surveys was used to recommend to professors and the program’s director, specific concepts that should be revisited in subsequent courses. Thus while a analysis of the Fellow’s (group) TEL scores would predict trends of understanding of categories, (for example macro economics) the comfort survey analysis provided immediate feedback on specific concepts within the in larger categories. For example, seven items from the macroeconomics on the first summer had nearly equivalent mean item scores on pre – and post-tests. In curriculum planning sessions for the second summer professors committed to reteach both concepts and discussed different pedagogical practices to address the students needs. To determine the benefit of reteaching the concepts they were added to the post comfort survey administered at the end of the second summer. The results appear in Table 10.
Table 10 Formative Assessment of Macroeconomics
|
Macroeconomics (7 concepts) |
N
|
Mean
|
Alpha
|
t score
|
Sig
|
ES
|
|
Pre-test (Sum 99) |
31 |
14.39 |
0.94 |
----- |
----- |
----- |
|
Post-test (Fall
99) |
31 |
15.39 |
0.89 |
1.39 |
nonsig |
0.27 |
|
Re-test (Fall 00) |
31 |
19.94 |
0.89 |
7.42 |
p<0.001 |
1.32 |
|
Total Change |
31 |
----- |
----- |
7.51 |
p<0.001 |
1.55 |
Furthermore, to document the
staying power of the fellows’ experience, or more appropriately, the retention
of their comfort with economic concepts.
During fall 2001, we administered a retrospective comfort survey, asking
fellows to report on a randomly selected subsample of the concepts addressed
during the 1999 and 2000 summer sessions.
Table 11 clearly demonstrates that one to two years after their initial
instruction, the fellows maintained their comfort with economic concepts.
Table 11 Retention of Comfort
|
Comfort Surveys |
N
|
Mean
|
Alpha
|
t score
|
Sig
|
ES
|
|
Pre-tests (99,00) |
22 |
141.23 |
0.95 |
----- |
----- |
----- |
|
Retrospective test
(01) |
22 |
190.05 |
0.97 |
10.52 |
p<0.001 |
2.64 |
This is important because
self-reported comfort with economic concepts was found to be a good proxy for
assessing economic literacy as measured by the TUCE. Fellows’ scores on both the macroeconomics
and microeconomics comfort survey pretests (1999) were positively and
significantly correlated with their scores appropriate TUCE. Both correlations were significant at the 0.01
level (Macro: r = 0.645, N = 29, p < 0.01; Micro: r
= 0.584, N = 29, p < 0.01). This potentially indicates the
ability to self-assess comfort levels may be a quick and reliable measure of
economic literacy.
Change in Practice surveys were used to determine whether participation in the Institute directly affected fellows’ instructional practices regarding a wide variety of economic concepts and pedagogical practices. The surveys were administered during the springs of 2000 and 2001, and explored the concepts/practices in Financial Markets, Macroeconomics, Microeconomics, and Pedagogy. A final Change in Practice survey with be administered in spring 2002 to examine the concepts taught during the summer institute of 2001. Each item on the surveys was rated on whether it resulted in a) no change in practice, b) improved practice/teaching of concept, or c) inclusion of new concept/practice into their repertoires.
|
|
# of items |
I’ve not taught this before last summer, but now I teach it. |
I taught this before last summer, but now I am teaching it better. |
My practice is unchanged. |
|
Macroeconomics |
31 |
17.3 % |
22.4 % |
60.4 % |
|
Microeconomics |
44 |
19.6 % |
37.9 % |
42.5 % |
|
Pedagogy |
25 |
8.0 % |
60.6 % |
31.4 % |
|
|
# of items |
I’ve not taught this before last summer, but now I teach it. |
I taught this before last summer, but now I am teaching it better. |
My practice is unchanged. |
|
Financial Markets |
31 |
12.3 % |
23.8 % |
63.9 % |
|
Industrial Organizations |
22 |
8.8 % |
45.7 % |
45.5 % |
|
Pedagogy |
13 |
7.9 % |
67.2 % |
24.8 % |
This data reveals the value of interdisciplinary (economics and education) preparation in impacting teachers’ professional development. Additionally, data reveal that the institute influenced the curriculum delivered by fellows in their respective classrooms. Fellows reported teaching concepts normally not in the taught curriculum and teaching concepts already in the curriculum better. While more teachers reported that as a result of their new learning they were teaching economic concepts that they had not taught prior to their participation in the institute, there were fewer teachers indicating that the strategies\practices taught in the pedagogy course were concepts in which they were unfamiliar. However, over 60% of the participants reported in two different surveys that as a result of the pedagogy coursework, they were now more skilled in using known instructional strategies\practices. Although there was reported change in all categories the amount of change associated with pedagogical concepts reflects the value of including a pedagogical aspect to the fellows’ course of study.
While this research did not explicitly consider why the known practices and concepts taught were reported as being used in a better manner, the change in fellows’ practices may be connected to the relevancy of the coursework to their work as teachers. Likewise, fellows reported some change in practice as it pertained to macroeconomics and financial markets however; it was in these two areas that the least amount of change was recorded indicating that the two may currently be a primary focus of existing economics curricula or not an area not considered for k-12 curricula. The phenomenon calls for further research.
Analysis of the overall quality of Idaho Economic Fellows Institute explored several different facets of the institute, including quality of faculty, quality of housing and amenities, and overall organization and support. These factors were assessed using a. At the end of each summer, fellows provided feedback regarding these factors through surveys that included both Lichert-type and open-ended responses. Furthermore, the surveys allowed fellows to reflect on their experience and offer suggestions or considerations for remainder of the three-year institute.
Across the three years of data collection, fellows consistently rated the instructors very well. The average rating of instructors for overall merit was consistently between 4 and 5 on a five-point scale, with the final summer evaluation averaging 4.59. The courses were likewise evaluated consistently between 4 and 5, with courses in the third summer yielding an average of 4.42.
The overall evaluation of the institute was consistently high, with the 2001 evaluation of 4.77 on a five-point scale. However, the open response nature of the surveys allowed the evaluators to identify specific areas in need of improvement. For example, during the 1999 summer, several fellows indicated that the daily schedule of the courses was not optimal for their learning. After careful consideration of balancing the needs of the instructors and the needs of the fellows, a modified schedule was designed that satisfied both parties’ needs. As a result of the formative assessment, each year there were some subtle, yet important, program changes. The ongoing formative assessment was a very important part of maintaining the high quality of the Idaho Economic Fellows Institute.
Although professional literature (Fullan, 2001; DuFour & Eaker, 1998) indicates that the creation of learning communities promotes collaborative learning experiences, provides academic and social support and fosters learning, educators when enrolled in advanced programs of study may or may not develop a learning partnership with others pursuing a similar degree. Within the institute studied, program directors actively cultivated supportive relationships among the fellows. During the institute, the fellows have had opportunities to participate in Ropes courses, attend minor league baseball games, whitewater raft, and travel to the Federal Reserve Bank in San Francisco together. At the conclusion of their last summer together (2001), several fellows remarked on the strength of the relationships and friendships generated among their peers. So strong were their feelings of camaraderie, many suggested that the Idaho Council for Economic Education facilitate reunion activities in the future. Such relationships rarely occur among participants in traditional forms of professional development or graduate study in education.
Discussion
Our evaluation of the Idaho Economic Fellows Institute clearly supports this format of teacher preparation and/or professional development. The three-year structured program contains many of the facets of professional development commonly referenced within the literature as critical to supporting high quality teaching. These factors include professional development that[1]
v is based on view of teaching as intellectual work, and recognizes teachers as professionals.
v is connected to knowledge of the content that is being taught, and is aligned with local or national content standards.
v is ongoing, sustained over time, and allows time and follow-up support for teacher to master new content and strategies and to integrate them into their practice.
v includes training, practice, and feedback; opportunities to reflect, analyze and work on their practice, and supports the inquiry into and study of teaching and learning.
v is practical, and embedded in teacher work
v is collaborative, and provides opportunities for teachers to interact with peers through group inquiry into practice or coaching, and establishes a learning community of which all teachers are members.
v treats teachers as active learners.
Learning experiences that incorporate the above factors create learning environments in which professional educators may work iteratively on improving and refining both their pedagogical repertoire and the understanding of subject matter.
Use of comfort surveys to approximate the economic literacy of the fellows may allow educators to gauge their relative strengths within the larger discipline of economics. Our research indicates that it was not necessary to use a standardized assessment to test the fellows’ economic literacy. Simply put, teachers do not necessarily need to be tested to learn what they know. All one has to do is to ask teacchers in a condition which is conducive to their honest response. Additionally, by engaging teachers in a reflective process it is possible to consider their input as to what constitutes meaningful and necessary professional development. Thus, by replacing tests used to confirm what a learner knows, with specific content related non-threatening questions may in fact make professional development programs more humane, more responsive to the learners’ needs and save valuable program resources.
Upon review of the data collected to date, we can confidently state that teacher-training programs such as the Idaho Economic Fellows Institute can positively impact
v teacher knowledge
v teacher comfort/confidence/practice
v student learning.
To maximize the effect of such programs, we highly recommend that program directors engage detailed, formative assessment conducted by competent, third party evaluators. In the case of the Idaho Institute, the use of formative feedback was critical to maintaining high program quality and meeting the evolving needs of the participants.
Furthermore, it is possible to document the impact of focused, long-term professional development, not only on teacher knowledge, but also on student learning when longitudinal data is carefully collected. It is important that evaluation of professional development programs move beyond the traditional rating of how teachers "enjoyed" the experience, or how useful they think the information is. These ratings, usually conducted immediately after the conclusion of the professional development experience at best are worthless, and are downright harmful to future professional development decisions at worst. Only by carefully collecting a wide range of detailed, longitudinal data can accurate, useful information inform such decisions to the benefit of K-12 student learning.
References
Allgood, S. and Walstad, W. (1999) The longitudinal effects of economic education on teachers and their students. Journal of Economic Education. 30 (Spring) 99-111.
Dufour, R. & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Services.
Fullan, M. ( 2001) The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Goodlad, J. (1990) Teachers for our nation’s schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hermanowicz,
H.J. (1991). Recommendations for teacher
education in the context of the reform movement. In W.B. Walstad & J.C.
Soper (Eds.) Effective Economic Education in the Schools, Washington, DC;
National Education Association, 70-80.
Jenkins,
S. & Nelson, J. (2000). Program evaluation and delivery in economics
education. Journal of Economics & Economic Education Research. 1 99-108
Lynch,
G. (1990) The effect of teacher course work on student learning: evidence from
the TEL. Journal of Economics Education
21 (Summer) 287-298
National
Commission on Teaching and Aerica’s Future. (1996) What matters most: Teaching
for America’s future. New York: Author; Columbia University, Teachers College.
Schug, M.C. (1985) Economics in School Curriculum, K-12. Washington, DC: The National Education Association .
Walstad
W. and Soper, J. (1988) A report card on the economic literacy of U.S. high
school students. American Economic Review 78 (May) 251-56.
Walstad, W. & Soper,
J. (1988) Journal of Economic Education. What is high school economics? TEL Revision
an Pretest findings.19)
[1] The above list is based on the works of Novick 1996, Dorph & Holtz 2000, Sullivan 1999, Daniels 1999, Putnam & Borko 1997, U.S. Department of Education 1995, Abdal-Haqq 1996, Fine & Raack 1994, Corcoran 1995, Little 1988, Joyce & Showers 1982.