User Settings
Open AccessBook Chapter10.57709/1060090

Evaluating the Teacher-Intern-Professor Model in a Professional Development School Partnership Setting using a Bayesian Approach to Mix Methods

August Ogletree-2022-05-10-ProQuest LLC eBooks
1

TL;DRAbstract

Two needs of Georgia State University Professional Development School Partnerships are to show increases in both student academic achievement and teacher efficacy. The Teacher-Intern-Professor (TIP) Model was designed to address these needs. The TIP model focuses on using the university and school partnership to support Georgia State University student intern preparedness and student academic achievement for those participating in the program. TIP Model outcomes were analyzed using a quasi-experimental design for achievement data and a Bayesian approach to mix methods for efficacy data. Quantitative data, in the form of test scores, were analyzed to compare mean student academic achievement at the classroom level. Mean differences between treatment and comparison groups were not significant for the TIP treatment factor (F(1, 60) = .248, p =.620) as measured by a benchmark test. Results favored the treatment group over control group for the TIP treatment factor (F(1, 56) = 17.967, p < .

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

Two needs of Georgia State University Professional Development School Partnerships are to show increases in both student academic achievement and teacher efficacy. The Teacher-Intern-Professor (TIP) Model was designed to address these needs. The TIP model focuses on using the university and school partnership to support Georgia State University student intern preparedness and student academic achievement for those participating in the program. TIP Model outcomes were analyzed using a quasi-experimental design for achievement data and a Bayesian approach to mix methods for efficacy data. Quantitative data, in the form of test scores, were analyzed to compare mean student academic achievement at the classroom level. Mean differences between treatment and comparison groups were not significant for the TIP treatment factor (F(1, 60) = .248, p =.620) as measured by a benchmark test. Results favored the treatment group over control group for the TIP treatment factor (F(1, 56) = 17.967, p < .

Keywords

Qualitative propertyGeneral partnershipMathematics educationPsychologyTest (biology)Professional developmentPreparednessBayesian probability

Chat

Click to start Chat