Teacher Education Instruments

Teacher/Faculty Interviews

Instrument 2: LaCEPT CRP Evaluation Site Visits, Interview Guide for Deans

Project: Louisiana Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers (LaCEPT)
Louisiana Board of Regents

Funding Source: NSF: Collaboratives for Excellence in Teacher Preparation (DUE)

Purpose: Assess program impact and general status of reforms in the teacher preparation program and improvement of undergraduate math and science instruction

Administered To: Campus deans

Topics Covered:

• Attitudes & Beliefs (Teacher/Faculty): impact, project
• Implementation Activities: awareness, support
• Institutional Context: faculty incentives
• Mentoring & Support: peers
• Plans & Expectations (Teacher/Faculty): continue reform practice
• Project Evaluation: areas for program improvement, expectations
• Self-Assessment (Teacher/Faculty): awareness, implementation activities
• Background Characteristics & Activites (Teacher/Faculty): project involvement

Format/Length: 15 open-ended questions

LaCEPT CRP Evaluation Site Visits
October/November 1997
Interview Guide for Deans

Interviewee  ____________________________

Campus     ____________________________

Is it OK if we tape this interview, we will not quote you directly without permission, although we may report the gist of what you say. Recording the interview will enable us to ensure the accuracy of the report to the National Science Foundation. You should be assured that the focus of this evaluation is to look at the statewide program, not to evaluate each individual campus.

1. To what extent are you familiar with the standards-based reform effort that is going on nationally?

    

2. What is your opinion about that effort? Do you feel that it has had or will have a positive effect on the preparation of preservice mathematics and science teachers (or undergraduate students)?

    

3. Are there concerns or reservations that you have about the approach? Are there certain cautions you would give those participating in this reform effort?

    

4. (Follow up if appropriate.) What would you need to know to assure you that this approach is worth supporting?

    

5. To what extent are the faculty in your college in agreement with the goals and approaches advocated by standards-based reform proponents? Are there any developments that you think will change this assessment?

    

6. In your judgment, how many and what percent of the courses you teach that are typically taken by preservice teachers or undergraduate non-majors would you say are significantly reformed? Are there any developments that you think will change this assessment?

    

7. (For Education Dean) What percentage of the preservice elementary or mathematics or science teachers graduating would you say would be at least reasonably well equipped to teach using reform principles and techniques? Are there any developments that you think will change this assessment?

    

8. Let's talk about rewards and incentives. What is the likelihood that a person who is successfully involved in this reform effort (e.g., reforming courses, recognized as a state or national leader in reform activities) will be given as much consideration as someone who is equally successful in publishing?

    

9. (Follow up if appropriate.) What would have to happen for additional credit to be given to successful standards-based reform participants?

    

10. To what extent is the administration knowledgeable about and supportive of this reform effort?

     

11. To what extent are you aware of or involved in the LaCEPT campus renewal grant program?

     

12. To what extent has the CRG program at your campus made a difference? In what ways would you describe the impact that it has had?

     

13. What will happen after the LaCEPT program concludes? Will reform efforts under way now be continued?

     

14. (Follow up as appropriate. What would have to happen for the reform effort to continue?

     

15. Do you have an answer to a question that you were just hoping that we would ask you?