This analysis shows consistency of performance among the first category of students that the district education researched. There are no widespread differences in their performance. There is a positive trend where student’s portrays consistency in terms of performance.
The analysis of the first year shows a positive trend of performance. This can be attributed to factors like; lack of knowledge by the teachers about the on-going research
1. What is the impact of parental involvement? Is it true that children of involved parents do better academically in this school district? There is a great impact of parent’s involvement into the educational matters of their children. Most of the children who had their parents’ guide them throughout the term shows a positive improvement in their performance. Yes, those students who involve their parents in their school matters show better results in terms of academic performance.
2. Using Criterion 1, are any teachers rated as good in one year, but poor in the other? If so, does seem reasonable that a teacher's ability changes from year to year? How can these rating changes be explained? Yes, the performance of the teachers seems to be fluctuating from good to bad and vice versa. This can be attributed to the composition of the students and their attitude towards education. Teachers have a general duty of imparting knowledge to the students.
3. Using Criterion 1, does it appear that any teachers are classified incorrectly? In other words, are any teachers considered good when they actually are poor, or vice versa? According to criterion 1, some teachers are classified wrongly. The performance of students is varied, but that of the teachers remains constant. This is one of the factors that can lead to derive this conclusion. There is no poor teacher that can influence positive performance of a student. Therefore, all the teachers can be rated as good.
4. Is Criterion 1 a reasonable way to assess teacher ability? Why or why not? Yes, this is the best criterion that can be used to perform a defined analysis of the teachers and their capacity to impact knowledge on students. This criterion evaluates the teacher performance across all the performance of students in the class.
5. Using Criterion 2, are any teachers rated as good in one year, but poor in the other? If so, does seem reasonable that a teacher's ability changes from year to year? How can these rating changes be explained? Criterion 2 shows a fluctuating performance of the teachers. This can be attributed to the fact of the capacity of students to cooperate with the teacher. The teacher’s ability does change from one year into the next one.
6. Using Criterion 2, does it appear that any teachers are classified incorrectly? In other words, are any teachers considered good when they actually are poor, or vice versa? No, criterion 2 classifies all the teachers equally. It shows a quality assurance access of all the teachers.
7. Is Criterion 2 a reasonable way to assess teacher ability? Why or why not? No, this is because; failure of the students cannot only be attributed to the performance of the teacher. It includes other myriad of factors that are widespread.
8. Based on the data, how would you describe the abilities of each teacher? A cross-analysis of the teachers shows a positive impact of knowledge upon the students. Teachers are hard working.
Bibliography;
Good, TL 2014, 'What Do We Know About How Teachers Influence Student Performance on Standardized Tests: And Why Do We Know So Little About Other Student Outcomes?', Teachers College Record, 116, 1, pp. 1-41
Heldsinger, S, & Humphry, S 2013, 'Using calibrated exemplars in the teacher-assessment of writing: an empirical study', Educational Research, 55, 3, pp. 219-235,
Kopcha, T, & Alger, C 2014, 'Student teacher communication and performance during the clinical experience supported by a technology-enhanced cognitive apprenticeship', Computers & Education, 72, pp. 48-58,
