Home General Documents Institutional Report Conceptual Framework
Exhibit Room Louisiana St. Supp. Rep. SPA Reports  


LIST OF EXHIBITS LASS

EXHIBIT LASS 1.16

Summary of Teacher Education Graduate Follow-Up Survey

2005-2006 

1. (29) Principal of beginning teachers and (10) beginning teachers in two parishes were asked to complete a

     survey:

  • Domains in the Components of Effective Teaching and added a few others (Technology, Collaboration, Student Achievement)
  • Teachers – How well prepared were they in these areas
  • Principals – How effective were the teachers in these areas

 

2. Principals

  • Areas most effective – Student Achievement (3.48), Instruction, Technology, and Content Knowledge (all average 3.44)
  • Areas least effective – School Improvement, Diversity, and Management

3. Teachers

  • Areas best prepared – Management, Instruction, and Student Achievement
  • Areas least prepared – Diversity and School Improvement

4. Areas of Support Most Requested

  • Diverse learning needs
  • Assessment
  • Management
  • Technology
  • Parents

5. Preference of Delivery:

  • Workshops                               __16___
  • Printed Material                        __10___
  • Direct Contact with University   ___1___
  • Website                                    ___6___

 Employer: Teacher Education Graduate Follow-up Survey 

 

LIVINGSTON PARISH

On a scale from 1-4 with “1” being “unsatisfactory” and “4” being “exemplary.”

Employee

Beginning

N=10

Employer:  Beginning

N=16*

N=29**

Employer:

1-3 years

N=9*

N=16**

1.   PLANNING:

      Was prepared to plan effectively for instruction

3.78

3.38

3.89

2.   MANAGEMENT: 

      Was prepared to maintain an environment conductive to learning, maximizes the amount of time available for instruction, and manages learner behavior to provide productive learning opportunities

3.89

3.13

3.67

3.   INSTRUCTION:

      Was prepared to deliver instruction effectively and provides opportunity for student involvement in the learning process

3.89

3.50

3.78

4.   ASSESSMENT:

      Was prepared to consistently monitor and assess student performance effectively

3.78

3.19

3.56

5.   DIVERSITY:

      Was prepared to understand how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instruction opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners

3.56

3.19

3.33

6.   TECHNOLOGY:

      Was prepared to use technological tools and/or the products of technology to promote learning and expand instruction options

3.78

3.38

3.22

7.   COTENT KNOWLEDGE:

a)      Was prepared to use the Louisiana State Content Standards and Benchmarks to plan instruction

b)      Was prepared to exhibit relevant, up-to-date content of the discipline being taught, including concepts, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues

3.78

3.50

3.89

3.78

3.50

3.79

8.   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: 

      Was prepared to plan for and engage in meaningful professional self-development

3.67

3.19

3.22

9.   SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT:

      Was prepared to take an active role in school improvement planning, implementation, and evaluation

3.56

3.00

3.56

10. COLLABORATION: 

      Was prepared to create partnerships with parents/ caregivers and colleagues.

3.78

3.31

3.78

11. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT:

      Was prepared to have a positive impact on student learning,

3.89

3.50

3.67

  *Number of employer responses
**Number of employees reported

 

TANGIPAHOA PARISH

On a scale from 1-4 with “1” being “unsatisfactory” and “4” being “exemplary.”

Employer:  Beginning

N=9*

N=10**

Employer:

1-3 years

N=11*

N=37**

1.   PLANNING:

      Was prepared to plan effectively for instruction

3.33

3.45

2.   MANAGEMENT: 

      Was prepared to maintain an environment conductive to learning, maximizes the amount of time available for instruction, and manages learner behavior to provide productive learning opportunities

3.11

3.55

3.   INSTRUCTION:

      Was prepared to deliver instruction effectively and provides opportunity for student involvement in the learning process

3.33

3.55

4.   ASSESSMENT:

      Was prepared to consistently monitor and assess student performance effectively

3.11

3.55

5.   DIVERSITY:

      Was prepared to understand how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instruction opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners

3.00

3.18

6.   TECHNOLOGY:

      Was prepared to use technological tools and/or the products of technology to promote learning and expand instruction options

3.56

3.82

7.   COTENT KNOWLEDGE:

c)      Was prepared to use the Louisiana State Content Standards and Benchmarks to plan instruction

d)      Was prepared to exhibit relevant, up-to-date content of the discipline being taught, including concepts, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues

3.33

3.36

3.33

3.45

8.   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: 

      Was prepared to plan for and engage in meaningful professional self-development

3.22

3.36

9.   SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT:

      Was prepared to take an active role in school improvement planning, implementation, and evaluation

2.89

3.36

10. COLLABORATION: 

      Was prepared to create partnerships with parents/ caregivers and colleagues.

3.33

3.45

11. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT:

      Was prepared to have a positive impact on student learning,

3.44

3.64

  *Number of employer responses
**Number of employees reported  

TOTAL

On a scale from 1-4 with “1” being “unsatisfactory” and “4” being “exemplary.”

 

Employer:  Beginning

N=25*

N=39**

Employer:

1-3 years

N=20*

N=53**

1.   PLANNING:

      Was prepared to plan effectively for instruction

3.36

3.65

2.   MANAGEMENT: 

      Was prepared to maintain an environment conductive to learning, maximizes the amount of time available for instruction, and manages learner behavior to provide productive learning opportunities

3.12

3.60

3.   INSTRUCTION:

      Was prepared to deliver instruction effectively and provides opportunity for student involvement in the learning process

3.44

3.65

4.   ASSESSMENT:

      Was prepared to consistently monitor and assess student performance effectively

3.16

3.55

5.   DIVERSITY:

      Was prepared to understand how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instruction opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners

3.12

3.23

6.   TECHNOLOGY:

      Was prepared to use technological tools and/or the products of technology to promote learning and expand instruction options

3.44

3.55

7.   COTENT KNOWLEDGE:

e)      Was prepared to use the Louisiana State Content Standards and Benchmarks to plan instruction

f)       Was prepared to exhibit relevant, up-to-date content of the discipline being taught, including concepts, principles, relationships, methods of inquiry, and key issues

3.44

3.60

3.44

3.60

8.   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: 

      Was prepared to plan for and engage in meaningful professional self-development

3.20

3.30

9.   SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT:

      Was prepared to take an active role in school improvement planning, implementation, and evaluation

2.96

3.45

10. COLLABORATION: 

      Was prepared to create partnerships with parents/ caregivers and colleagues.

3.32

3.60

11. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT:

      Was prepared to have a positive impact on student learning,

3.48

3.65

  *Number of employer responses
**Number of employees reported

Livingston Employer: Teacher Education Graduate Follow-up Survey

Additional Comments:

  • Areas that are not a 4 often are because the teacher is new.  I prefer SLU Graduates because they are always prepared to teach.
  • We had to work with her on reaching all students at their level.
  • Both adapted very well to the new Comprehensive Curriculum this year.
  • Ms. Hogan does a very good job. With experience, she will be an outstanding teacher.
  • Didn’t have any first-year teachers, but in general, let me say that the students you folks put out are much better prepared to meet the rigors of their first year than other programs.  I hope you will continue to put out a quality product.
  • The teacher I have is in her third year of teaching and does an excellent job inside and outside the classroom.
  • Teachers have been well prepared to enter the classroom.  Time management has been the greatest concern but experience and mentoring has greatly assisted teacher growth in this area.
  • Both are “Great Teachers”.
  • I think SLU grads are the best prepared in the state.  I would hire an SLU grad over any other all things being equal.  The new teachers are not knowledgeable of the comprehensive curriculum.  They all reference benchmark and standards.  This shortfall must be addressed in the SLU curriculum.  The new teachers are generally more familiar wit classroom technology than all older teachers.
  • The student teachers from SLU seem to do well.
  • Two of the teachers of the beginning teachers are top notch.  But one is week.  The two teachers were well prepared and provide excellent learning opportunities to their students.

Livingston Employee: Beginning Teacher Education Graduate Follow-up Survey

Additional Support:

  • Managing learner’s behavior, professional development, assessing student’s performance effectively, and school improvement.
  • Dealing with administrators who differ in theories of learning and teaching.
  • Technology use in the classroom.
  • Building working relationships with parents and tips for maximizing planning time.
  • Classroom management
  • Individual differences
  • I always completed my field experiences in the upper grades.  After teaching the second grade for the second half of the year I wish I had a college course just in phonics.  I did not feel comfortable teaching phonics when I began teaching.  This year I went to the Project Read workshop, and now I feel very confident teaching phonics.
  • Assessment
  • Writing grants
  • I feel regular education majors do not get enough information to teach special education students.
  • I think that SLU should provide students with more information on dealing with parents, conferences, and technology resources that can be accessed through the classroom for use within the classroom (educational games, interactive websites, student friendly websites).
  • Informal assessment techniques
  • Professional Development
  • Instruction
  • Meeting the needs of individual students and planning for their diverse learning styles.
  • Grading and classroom management of assessments (paperwork management); “centers” applications
  • Diversity
  • Technology
  • Planning for the lower and higher learning students and time management.
  • Kindergarten curriculum (centers)
  • School improvement
  • Comprehensive curriculum
  • Assessment; non-traditional

Preference of Delivery 

Workshops                              __16___

Printed Material                        __10___

Direct Contact with University   ___1___

Website                                    ___6___

 Additional Comments:

  • I feel that SLU prepared me to be in a classroom.  I just wish there was a system in place that each teacher from beginning classes to your methods would use the same format for lesson plans.  Once you learned how to do it, then the teacher would not have to waste so much instruction time with formatting a lesson plan.
  • My undergraduate program did not fully prepare me, however I feel better prepared through the Teacher Scholars Program.
  • I really enjoyed my time at SLU and I had great teachers.
  • Managing paperwork and assessment materials needs to be addressed at all levels and specifically the 415 level.  Overall, I feel my education provided me with the necessary tools I need to be a successful and effective teacher. Thank you.
  • SLU provided me with the education, tools, role models and inspiration to allow me to become an effective and professional educator.  THANK YOU for all I have learned!
  • I felt well prepared for this year in every area.
  • Comprehensive curriculum was implemented after I had graduated.  It was difficult to get accustomed to the new curriculum since I began in January 2006.

Tangipahoa Employer: Teacher Education Graduate Follow-up Survey

Additional Comments:

  • In the last 10 years I have not hired new grads from any university.  In 2004, I hired 2 new grads from SLU and they have been well prepared. This year I hired another SLU graduate at mid-term and she is doing well.  I believe they you are beginning to prepare the new teachers to teach in the high-risk school.  This must be done to a greater degree.  Student teaching needs to be extended to a full year.  The student teachers just begin to understand what is expected in the classroom and then the semester ends.
  • One difference I see between the “new” SLU grads and the grads with 3 years experience is the grads with 3 years have elementary certifications and the “new” teacher has a secondary certification.  Another difference is the grads with 3 years have completed the Tangi F.I.R.S.T. program and the new teacher, who graduated in December 2005, has not entered the program yet.
  • I think the survey should be conducted in a different manner because in the 1-3 years’ experience group, there were 2 of the 4 teachers who really affected the way I scored that group.  Two were exceptional, and two were not and need a lot of work to be employed next school year.
  • The SLU graduates who have been hired during the last 5 years have been exemplary.  Student teacher preparation has played an iatrical part in this.
  • Our new teachers are doing a fantastic job.  I wish the older ones were able to get a refresher course.
 

  

 


Southeastern Louisiana University
© 2007 Southeastern Louisiana University
All Rights Reserved
Unofficial and external sites are not endorsed by Southeastern Louisiana University