Group items tagged

Measuring Teacher Effectiveness Significant State Data Capacity is Required to Measure and Improve Teacher Effectiveness  States Increasingly Focus on Improving Teacher Effectiveness: There is significant activity at the local, state, and federal levels to  measure and improve teacher effectiveness, with an unprecedented focus on the use of student achievement as a primary indicator of  effectiveness. > 23 states require that teacher evaluations include evidence of student learning in the form of student growth and/or value-added data (NCTQ, 2011). > 17 states and DC have adopted legislation or regulations that specifically require student achievement and/or student growth to "significantly" inform or be the primary criterion in teacher evaluations(NCTQ, 2011).  States Need Significant Data Capacity to Do This Work: These policy changes have significant data implications. > The linchpin of all these efforts is that states must reliably link students and teachers in ways that capture the complex connections that  exist in schools. > If such data is to be used for high stakes decisions-such as hiring, firing, and tenure-it must be accepted as valid, reliable, and fair. > Teacher effectiveness data can be leveraged to target professional development, inform staffing assignments, tailor classroom instruction,  reflect on practice, support research, and otherwise support teachers.  Federal Policies Are Accelerating State and Local Efforts: Federal policies increasingly support states' efforts to use student  achievement data to measure teacher effectiveness. > Various competitive grant funds, including the Race to the Top grants and the Teacher Incentive Fund, require states to implement teacher  and principal evaluation systems that take student data into account.  > States applying for NCLB waivers, including the 11 that submitted requests in November 2011, must commit to implementing teacher and  principal evaluation and support systems. > P

Assessment and analytics, supported by information technology, can change institutional culture and drive the transformation in student retention, graduation, and success. U.S. higher education has an extraordinary record of accomplishment in preparing students for leadership, in serving as a wellspring of research and creative endeavor, and in providing public service. Despite this success, colleges and universities are facing an unprecedented set of challenges. To maintain the country's global preeminence, those of us in higher education are being called on to expand the number of students we educate, increase the proportion of students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and address the pervasive and long-standing underrepresentation of minorities who earn college degrees-all at a time when budgets are being reduced and questions about institutional efficiency and effectiveness are being raised.

Abstract Few traditions in higher education evoke more controversy, ambivalence, criticism, and, at the same time, support than student evaluation of instruction (SEI). Ostensibly, results from these end-of-course survey instruments serve two main functions: they provide instructors with formative input for improving their teaching, and they serve as the basis for summative profiles of professors' effectiveness through the eyes of their students. In the academy, instructor evaluations also can play out in the high-stakes environments of tenure, promotion, and merit salary increases, making this information particularly important to the professional lives of faculty members. At the research level, the volume of the literature for student ratings impresses even the most casual observer with well over 2,000 studies referenced in the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) alone (Centra, 2003) and an untold number of additional studies published in educational, psychological, psychometric, and discipline-related journals. There have been numerous attempts at summarizing this work (Algozzine et al., 2004; Gump, 2007; Marsh & Roche, 1997; Pounder, 2007; Wachtel, 1998). Student ratings gained such notoriety that in November 1997 the American Psychologist devoted an entire issue to the topic (Greenwald, 1997). The issue included student ratings articles focusing on stability and reliability, validity, dimensionality, usefulness for improving teaching and learning, and sensitivity to biasing factors, such as the Dr. Fox phenomenon that describes eliciting high student ratings with strategies that reflect little or no relationship to effective teaching practice (Ware & Williams, 1975; Williams & Ware, 1976, 1977).

We propose the concept of Contested Collective Intelligence (CCI) as a distinctive subset of the broader Collective Intelligence design space. CCI is relevant to the many organizational contexts in which it is important to work with contested knowledge, for instance, due to different intellectual traditions, competing organizational objectives, information overload or ambiguous environmental signals. The CCI challenge is to design sociotechnical infrastructures to augment such organizational capability. Since documents are often the starting points for contested discourse, and discourse markers provide a powerful cue to the presence of claims, contrasting ideas and argumentation, discourse and rhetoric provide an annotation focus in our approach to CCI. Research in sensemaking, computer-supported discourse and rhetorical text analysis motivate a conceptual framework for the combined human and machine annotation of texts with this specific focus. This conception is explored through two tools: a social-semantic web application for human annotation and knowledge mapping (Cohere), plus the discourse analysis component in a textual analysis software tool (Xerox Incremental Parser: XIP). As a step towards an integrated platform, we report a case study in which a document corpus underwent independent human and machine analysis, providing quantitative and qualitative insight into their respective contributions. A promising finding is that significant contributions were signalled by authors via explicit rhetorical moves, which both human analysts and XIP could readily identify. Since working with contested knowledge is at the heart of CCI, the evidence that automatic detection of contrasting ideas in texts is possible through rhetorical discourse analysis is progress towards the effective use of automatic discourse analysis in the CCI framework.

Satisfaction and its discontents 8 March 2012 The National Student Survey puts pressure on lecturers to provide 'enhanced' experiences. But, argues Frank Furedi, the results do not measure educational quality and the process infantilises students and corrodes academic integrity One of the striking features of a highly centralised system of higher education, such as that of the UK, is that the introduction of new targets and modifications to the quality assurance framework can have a dramatic impact in a very short space of time. When the National Student Survey was introduced in 2005, few colleagues imagined that, just several years down the road, finessing and managing its implementation would require the employment of an entirely new group of quality-assurance operatives. At the time, the NSS was seen by many as a relatively pointless public-relations exercise that would have only a minimal effect on academics' lives. It is unlikely that even its advocates would have expected the NSS to acquire a life of its own and become one of the most powerful influences on the form and nature of the work done in universities.

Creating an effective infographic requires both artistic sense and a clear vision of what to tell the audience. The following are some cool infographics we have collected. Some are colorful, some are simple, but all are informative and visually pleasing. Not only do they provide information in a format that is easy to understand, but they are also artistic creations in their own right.

Data presentation can be beautiful, elegant and descriptive. There is a variety of conventional ways to visualize data - tables, histograms, pie charts and bar graphs are being used every day, in every project and on every possible occasion. However, to convey a message to your readers effectively, sometimes you need more than just a simple pie chart of your results. In fact, there are much better, profound, creative and absolutely fascinating ways to visualize data. Many of them might become ubiquitous in the next few years.

"Awards for Excellence in Learning Analytics: Submissions The LA SIG operates an Awards program recognising excellence in the practical application of LA to enhance learning and teaching. A key driver for the Awards program is to create and share resources about effective LA practices. We want to give a voice to all who are working with LA to improve learning and teaching - whatever the scale of their endeavours.  To this end, all presentations from Award applicants are available below for viewing. (Submissions closed on 11 September).  We believe these presentations will form an important resource library around the use of LA in tertiary education across Australasia and New Zealand. You may view the awards submission criteria and other background information on the awards in the SIG Awards Program Information (PDF) and to find out more about LA-SIG activities, go here."

The SEI program is working with the teaching and learning community to gather evidence of the impact of instructional innovations and current practices and to help evaluate the results. The calls for more accountability in higher education, the shrinking budgets that often force larger class sizes, and the pressures to increase degree-completion rates are all raising the stakes for colleges and universities today, especially with respect to the instructional enterprise. As resources shrink, teaching and learning is becoming the key point of accountability. The evaluation of instructional practice would thus seem to be an obvious response to such pressures, with institutions implementing systematic programs of evaluation in teaching and learning, especially of instructional innovations.

National Survey of Student Engagement What is student engagement? Student engagement represents two critical features of collegiate quality. The first is the amount of time and effort students put into their studies and other educationally purposeful activities. The second is how the institution deploys its resources and organizes the curriculum and other learning opportunities to get students to participate in activities that decades of research studies show are linked to student learning. What does NSSE do? Through its student survey, The College Student Report, NSSE annually collects information at hundreds of four-year colleges and universities about student participation in programs and activities that institutions provide for their learning and personal development. The results provide an estimate of how undergraduates spend their time and what they gain from attending college. NSSE provides participating institutions a variety of reports that compare their students' responses with those of students at self-selected groups of comparison institutions. Comparisons are available for individual survey questions and the five NSSE Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice. Each November, NSSE also publishes its Annual Results, which reports topical research and trends in student engagement results. NSSE researchers also present and publish research findings throughout the year.

Technical Report KMI-11-01 June 2011 Simon Buckingham Shum and Rebecca Ferguson Abstract: We propose that the design and implementation of effective Social Learning Analytics presents significant challenges and opportunities for both research and enterprise, in three important respects. The first is the challenge of implementing analytics that have pedagogical and ethical integrity, in a context where power and control over data is now of primary importance. The second challenge is that the educational landscape is extraordinarily turbulent at present, in no small part due to technological drivers. Online social learning is emerging as a significant phenomenon for a variety of reasons, which we review, in order to motivate the concept of social learning, and ways of conceiving social learning environments as distinct from other social platforms. This sets the context for the third challenge, namely, to understand different types of Social Learning Analytic, each of which has specific technical and pedagogical challenges. We propose an initial taxonomy of five types. We conclude by considering potential futures for Social Learning Analytics, if the drivers and trends reviewed continue, and the prospect of solutions to some of the concerns that institution-centric learning analytics may provoke.