Existing Teacher Preparation Program Evaluations

Back to home

Purposes of TPP Evaluations

read more

❯

Existing TPP Evaluations

Entities Evaluating TPPs

read more

❯

Sources of Evidence

read more

❯

How to Develop a TPP Evaluation

read more

❯

About the Report

read more

❯

At various points, the same TPP may undergo different types of evaluation, each with its own purpose, data sources, methods, and consequences. A useful way to make sense of the complex landscape of TPP evaluation is to consider both the sources of evidence used to assess program quality and the entities doing the evaluation. ​

Interactive Tool: Attributes of Existing TPP Evaluation Systems

This table summarizes the five types of existing TPP evaluation systems in terms of the following elements: evidence, inferences, incentives, and consequences.

System
Column

Choose a system to read one approach in full, or choose a column to compare all five approaches on a single dimension.

Five types of evaluation systems for teacher preparation programs, compared across the evidence each one uses, the inferences it supports, the incentives it creates, and its likely intended and unintended consequences.
Types of Evaluation Systems Evidence: Input Measures Evidence: Output Measures Inferences Incentives for TPPs Likely Consequences
Federal government
  • Admission requirements
  • Student teaching requirements
  • Teacher certification test results
  • Proportion of students passing certification tests; average scale score for the program
  • Whether the program has a minimum GPA or SAT/ACT admission requirement
  • How much student teaching experience candidates are gaining
  • Whether a TPP has been identified by the state as low-performing
  • Must comply in order to receive any federal funds
  • IntendedVery low-performing programs identified, encouraging states to take remedial action or move toward closure
  • UnintendedGaming pass rates
State government
  • Varies by state; some use national accreditation process
  • Some states use VAMs
  • Varies by state; some use national accreditation process
  • Some states use VAMs
  • Program meets or does not meet state teacher education standards
  • Other inferences vary by state
  • Maintain ability to recommend teachers for state certification by having “stamp of approval” from state
  • If detailed data are made public, incentive to improve in areas of identified weakness
  • IntendedTPPs will be aligned with state standards for teacher education
  • IntendedPrograms may work to address areas of weakness identified
  • UnintendedPossibly more conformity and less innovation by programs
National accreditation
  • Admission requirements
  • Program documents and policies
  • Faculty qualifications
  • Case studies
  • Student teaching observations
  • Candidate performance assessments
  • Teacher certification test results
  • Hiring and retention
  • VAM if available
  • Employer satisfaction surveys
  • Program meets or does not meet national teacher education standards
  • Level of satisfaction of employers of graduates
  • Program strengths and weaknesses, aspects of program that need improvement
  • National “stamp of approval” can help with recruitment of highly qualified candidates and faculty
  • Often also serves as state approval
  • If detailed data are made public, incentive to improve in areas of identified weakness
  • IntendedTPPs will be aligned with standards for teacher education
  • IntendedPrograms may work to address areas of weakness identified
  • UnintendedPossibly more conformity and less innovation by programs
Media and independent organizations
  • Admission requirements
  • Course offerings
  • Syllabi
  • Textbooks
  • Student teaching observation instruments
 No output measures listed
  • Rating of programs according to performance categories (more nuanced information than pass/fail)
  • Extent to which program requirements and course materials align with standards held by the organization
  • Prestige associated with being highly rated, which may draw stronger faculty and students, as well as support from state policy makers
  • IntendedImprovement due to increased competition and desire to improve ratings
  • UnintendedOverreliance on syllabi may create perverse incentives (e.g., to create impressive syllabi that do not reflect actual instruction)
TPP evaluation for program improvement
  • Varies by study. Some use: course syllabi, student teaching observations, candidate work samples
  • Varies by study. Some use: candidate performance assessments, hiring and retention, VAM
  • Program strengths and weaknesses, aspects of program that need improvement
  • Strengthen the program
  • IntendedProgram improvement
  • UnintendedCulture of evidence within the program