Impact of Teachers’ Level of Education on
Effectiveness of Professional Development
Betty Zan & Mary Donegan-Ritter
Coaching and Mentoring
for Preschool Quality
(CAMP Quality)
A Head Start-University Partnership
Grant Project
CAMP Quality Project Goals
To increase the effectiveness of Head Start teachers
and assistant teachers in promoting the language,
academic, social, and emotional development of
children in their classrooms
To increase the effectiveness of Head Start
supervisors in mentoring and supervising Head
Start teachers
To improve the educational and social-emotional
outcomes of Head Start children
Year 2 Teachers
Experimental Group:
–! 38 teachers from 19 classrooms
(21 BA degrees, 5 AA degrees, 12<AA)
Comparison Group:
–! 23 teachers from 12 classrooms
(5 BA degrees, 10 AA degrees, 8 <AA)
CAMP Quality
Professional Development Model
!"#$%&"'%(
:021"#.23(
900#(
)"+5&.23(
)*+%%#"",(
-./0"1+'.23(
40+5&0#(
607058"2%(
Professional Development for Teachers
•! Bimonthly workshops
•! Monthly videotaping
•! Monthly cycle of:
!!Teacher reflection (individual teachers, using
video and Reflection Guides)
!!Peer coaching (teaching teams, using video
and Peer Coaching Guide)
!!Mentoring (teaching teams and mentor, using
Mentoring Guide)
Data Collected during Year 2
•! Demographics
•! Teacher Belief Scale (fall and spring)
•! CLASS ratings of monthly videotaped
classroom observations
•! PPVT-IV (fall and spring)
•! Head Start Teacher Feedback Scale
•! Mentoring Monitor (monthly)
End-of-Year CLASS Scores: Differences between
Intervention and Comparison Classrooms on Emotional Support
*$
!"#$
!$
&"'$
&"!$
&")$
&"($
&"%$
("*$
&$
("&$
F?72=12?0-?$
($
)$
3-?7=-4$
#$
%"($
%"%$
%"!$
860-?64$612=692$
%$
+$
,-./012$$
34/5672$
8296012$$
34/5672$
Positive Climate p = 0.034
Negative Climate p = 0.009
:26;<2=$$
>2?./01/7@$
A296=B$C-=$
>7DB2?7$,2=.E2;012.$
Teacher Sensitivity p = 0.047
Regard for Student Perspectives p = 0.003
End-of-Year CLASS Scores: Differences between Intervention
and Comparison Classrooms on Classroom Organization
*$
!$
&"'$
&"G$
&")$
&$
&"($
&"+$
("&$
F?72=12?0-?$
("G$
("+$
($
)"'$
3-?7=-4$
)$
860-?64$612=692$
#$
%$
+$
H2<61/-=$$
I6?69252?7$
,=-BD;01/7@$
Behavior Management p = 0.005
Instructional Learning Formats p = 0.003
F?.7=D;0-?64$$
J26=?/?9$K-=567.$
Productivity p = 0.023
End-of-Year CLASS Scores: Differences between Intervention and
Comparison Classrooms on Instructional Support
7
6
5
Intervention
4.1
3.9
4
3.1
Control
3.1
3
2.7
2.2
2
2.0
2.1
National
average
1
0
3-?;2E7$$
L2124-E52?7$
Concept Development p < 0.001
Language Modeling p < 0.001
MD64/7@$-C$
K22BN6;O$
J6?9D692$
I-B24/?9$
Quality of Feedback p < 0.001
CLASS Scores: Behavior Management Differences
between Degreed and Nondegreed Teachers
7
5.8
6
&"#$
5.8
&"#$
5
Beginning of
Year
End of Year
4
3
2
1
Degreed
Degreed p < 0.026
Nondegreed
Nondegreed p < 0.001
CLASS Scores: Productivity Differences between Degreed
and Nondegreed Teachers
7
6
5.9
5.7
5.3
5.2
5
Beginning of Year
End of Year
4
3
2
1
Degreed
Degreed p < 0.01
Nondegreed
Nondegreed p < 0.005
CLASS Scores: Quality of Feedback
Differences between Degreed and Nondegreed Teachers
7
6
Beginning of
Year
5
4.2
4.2
4
3.4
3.3
3
2
1
Degreed
Degreed p < 0.000
Nondegreed
Nondegreed p < 0.016
End of Year
CLASS Scores: Language Modeling Differences between
Degreed and Nondegreed Teachers
7
6
Beginning of
Year
5
3.9
4
3.3
3.8
3.3
3
2
1
Degreed
Degreed p < 0.002
Nondegreed
Nondegreed p < 0.031
End of Year
Conclusions
1.! Participation in CAMP Quality led to increased
scores on all domains of the CLASS.
2.! Degreed and nondegreed teachers benefited
from CAMP Quality to the same extent.
Mentor Development
•! Mentors are education supervisors, program
managers, others who support and supervise
classroom teachers.
•! Each mentor does CAMP PD with one
classroom team (lead and assistant)
•! All mentors attended a 2 day CLASS
reliability training in September.$$
:021"#()&+#+510#.%85%(
•!
•!
•!
•!
%'$K25642.$
I26?$P92Q$(*$@26=.$
I26?$:-764$R$S26=.$:26;</?9Q$%&$@26=.$
TBD;60-?$H6;O9=-D?BU$
–! )#V$PP$
–! &GV$HP$
–! %+V$IP$
Monthly Mentor
Development Meetings
•! $Share successes, challenges and explore
mentor role with project staff
•! Gain skills for active listening,
questioning, communicating strengths and
recommending changes
•! CLASS reliability checks
•! Share resources and strategies
Monthly Mentoring Meetings
•! Mentors meet with their team (a lead and
assistant teacher) regularly
•! Mentors use a guide with a structured
format for conducting each meeting
–! Which dimension can you compliment?
–! Which dimension could she improve?
–! Choose others from question bank
Sample Questions from
Mentor “Question Bank;(
•! How did you actively engage children when
you were leading this activity?
•! How did you support and guide children’s
interests?
•! What did you do to engage children in
experimenting?
•! What did you say to help children make
connections to their own lives?
A Mentor Testimonial:
$The teachers really improved immensely
in their awareness of and use of openended questions and multiple feedback
loops. They actually SAW how learning
was enhanced and extended because of
the way they were interacting and
planning.
Another Mentor said:
$Already when I make observations in other
classrooms I find myself using CAMP
Quality phrases. I reflect differently, give
feedback differently. I am amazed at the
little things that have made changes for
the better throughout the year.