Understanding the Relationship Between ST Math Professional Development and Its Impact on Students

• In Event: Facets of Large-Scale Evaluation Illustrated With ST Math: Examining Outcomes, Mediators, and Moderators

Abstract

This study is concerned with how teachers experience professional development (PD) designed to support their implementation of STMath with their students. Research shows that PD can impact teacher practice (Desimone et al., 2002) and student achievement (Wallace, 2009). However, less is known about how participation in PD influences teacher change. Research also shows that teacher self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) is linked with student achievement (Ross et al., 2001). The goal of this paper is to understand if participation in STMath PD influences teacher self-efficacy with respect to implementing STMath. We also examine if teacher self-efficacy influences student access to the software content and their subsequent math achievement.

Early math teachers lack a depth of math knowledge for teaching (Ma, 1999). Moreover, many beginning teachers experience anxiety about teaching mathematics (Swars et al., 2006), which can carry negative consequences for student math achievement (Beilock et al., 2010). Many teachers also find it challenging to work with representations of math ideas, and must build a range of strategies to anchor math instruction in these visualizations (Ball et al., 2009). Thus, the STMath PD sought to provide teachers with technical implementation skills as well as support them in integrating the software in their math teaching.

Our study sample consists of 406 teachers and their second through fifth grade students from 50 study schools. We limited the sample to teachers who reported they taught students at only one grade level and who had no missing data on the variables of interest. In the spring 2013, participants completed a survey related to the amount of STMath PD received, perceived usefulness of the PD, teacher self-efficacy in implementing STMath, and percentage of students who completed the STMath curriculum. All teacher variables were constructed from self-report data and fall into three categories: professional development, self-efficacy, and student advancement through the software. We will use scores from the CSTs, which will be released in August, to assess mastery of mathematics content standards.

To answer the first question, we regressed teacher self-efficacy (M=3, SD=.56) on perceived PD usefulness (M=2.5, SD = .67) while controlling for grade level, number of STMath PD hours, years teaching, years implementing STMath, and years using computer-based instruction. The results suggest that the more STMath PD teachers have, the more confident they are in implementing the program (d=.38, p<.0001). To answer the second question, we regressed teacher report of percentage of students completing the curriculum (M=38.41) on teacher self-efficacy, controlling for the same teacher characteristics. The results suggest that teacher self-efficacy is associated with a greater percentage of students completing the program (d=.14, p<.01). For every one-point increase in self-efficacy, teachers reported a 6.4% increase in the percentage of students who finish. To answer the third question, we will regress student achievement as measured by CST scores on teacher self-efficacy. The full paper will elaborate on all findings as they relate to the PD, teacher background, and the self-efficacy factors that contribute to student completion of STMath curriculum and success on CSTs.

Authors

• Jennifer Joan Long, University of California - Irvine

• Elizabeth A. van Es, University of California - Irvine