Advanced search options

Advanced Search Options 🞨

Browse by author name (“Author name starts with…”).

Find ETDs with:

in
/  
in
/  
in
/  
in

Written in Published in Earliest date Latest date

Sorted by

Results per page:

Sorted by: relevance · author · university · dateNew search

You searched for +publisher:"Rutgers University" +contributor:("Gitomer, Drew H."). Showing records 1 – 3 of 3 total matches.

Search Limiters

Last 2 Years | English Only

No search limiters apply to these results.

▼ Search Limiters


Rutgers University

1. Nordin, Timothy L., 1978-. Feedback filter: exploring factors affecting teachers’ use of observational data in teacher evaluation.

Degree: PhD, Education, 2014, Rutgers University

With the advent of a time of intense focus on the use of teacher evaluation in the United States as a mechanism for both formative development of teachers and summative actions affecting their careers, schools, districts, and states have rushed to implement new, enhanced systems of teacher observation and evaluation throughout the country. As many of these new programs are in their infancy, little attention has been paid to how the data generated within these new systems are being used, and what factors affect the usability of such data. While the research literature has focused on data use in the form of data driven decision making in other areas of education (see, e.g., Marsh, Pane & Hamilton, 2006) as well as on improving the reliability and validity of teacher evaluation (see, e.g., Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2013), studying how teachers use evaluation data is a relatively unexplored field. Using survey and qualitative focus group data from one state’s teacher evaluation pilot program, this study explores the ways in which teachers participating in a new evaluation system perceive their data use from observations. Additionally, teacher perceptions around how a number of affective factors –such as time, observer capacity, trust, and data quality, among others –play a role in influencing their ability to use data are explored. These questions help to support the conceptual framework and theory of action presented in the study. The study finds that teachers see themselves using data in three main ways: to improve practice, to learn about the system, and non-use of data. Additionally, teachers believed that many system functions, as well as data quality issues, were important factors that facilitated or hindered their ability to use the data delivered to them from their observation sessions. The study concludes by developing several hypothetical relationships between these factors and teacher data use, as well as acknowledging study limitations and avenues for further research.

Advisors/Committee Members: Firestone, William A (chair), Gitomer, Drew H (internal member), Lugg, Catherine A (internal member), Blitz, Cynthia L (outside member).

Subjects/Keywords: Teachers – Rating of – United States; Teachers – Training of – United States; Education and state – United States

Record DetailsSimilar RecordsGoogle PlusoneFacebookTwitterCiteULikeMendeleyreddit

APA · Chicago · MLA · Vancouver · CSE | Export to Zotero / EndNote / Reference Manager

APA (6th Edition):

Nordin, Timothy L., 1. (2014). Feedback filter: exploring factors affecting teachers’ use of observational data in teacher evaluation. (Doctoral Dissertation). Rutgers University. Retrieved from https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/45383/

Chicago Manual of Style (16th Edition):

Nordin, Timothy L., 1978-. “Feedback filter: exploring factors affecting teachers’ use of observational data in teacher evaluation.” 2014. Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers University. Accessed September 18, 2019. https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/45383/.

MLA Handbook (7th Edition):

Nordin, Timothy L., 1978-. “Feedback filter: exploring factors affecting teachers’ use of observational data in teacher evaluation.” 2014. Web. 18 Sep 2019.

Vancouver:

Nordin, Timothy L. 1. Feedback filter: exploring factors affecting teachers’ use of observational data in teacher evaluation. [Internet] [Doctoral dissertation]. Rutgers University; 2014. [cited 2019 Sep 18]. Available from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/45383/.

Council of Science Editors:

Nordin, Timothy L. 1. Feedback filter: exploring factors affecting teachers’ use of observational data in teacher evaluation. [Doctoral Dissertation]. Rutgers University; 2014. Available from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/45383/


Rutgers University

2. Joyce, Jeanette, 1962-. The artifact indicator project: three studies in the use of STEM classroom artifacts.

Degree: PhD, Education, 2017, Rutgers University

Calls for reform in STEM education have proliferated as nations strive to prepare students for the future global economy. The 21st century competencies described in the most recent reforms are represented in new standards (such as the Common Core State and Next Generation Science Standards). However, it is not enough to develop reforms through publication and legislation. What matters is how reform policies are interpreted by teachers and enacted in classrooms. Therefore, it becomes essential to have measures as indicators of how new reforms are reaching students and whether progress is being made toward reform goals. The following studies explore the possibility of using classroom artifacts in a complementary measure to classroom observations, achievement scores, and surveys. Classroom artifacts, which can include assigned tasks from teachers and the responding student work, are very useful in providing evidence about the instruction available to students. The proposed research extends the body of artifact work in several critical ways. First, study one provides a thematic synthesis of existing STEM artifact studies to develop a framework of design criteria. The second study will focus on the design of a standards-based science classroom artifact indicator protocol, informed by findings from the first study. Study three explores the development of a standards-based math artifact indicator protocol, which differs in critical ways from the science domain. Findings will be helpful to the artifact research community as well as stakeholders in STEM education as we move toward reforms in classroom instruction that includes both content and practices.

Advisors/Committee Members: Gitomer, Drew H (chair), Duncan, Ravit (internal member), Gobert, Janice (internal member), Martinez, Jose Felipe (outside member), School of Graduate Studies.

Subjects/Keywords: Science – Study and teaching; Technology – Study and teaching; Engineering – Study and teaching; Mathematics – Study and teaching

Record DetailsSimilar RecordsGoogle PlusoneFacebookTwitterCiteULikeMendeleyreddit

APA · Chicago · MLA · Vancouver · CSE | Export to Zotero / EndNote / Reference Manager

APA (6th Edition):

Joyce, Jeanette, 1. (2017). The artifact indicator project: three studies in the use of STEM classroom artifacts. (Doctoral Dissertation). Rutgers University. Retrieved from https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55514/

Chicago Manual of Style (16th Edition):

Joyce, Jeanette, 1962-. “The artifact indicator project: three studies in the use of STEM classroom artifacts.” 2017. Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers University. Accessed September 18, 2019. https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55514/.

MLA Handbook (7th Edition):

Joyce, Jeanette, 1962-. “The artifact indicator project: three studies in the use of STEM classroom artifacts.” 2017. Web. 18 Sep 2019.

Vancouver:

Joyce, Jeanette 1. The artifact indicator project: three studies in the use of STEM classroom artifacts. [Internet] [Doctoral dissertation]. Rutgers University; 2017. [cited 2019 Sep 18]. Available from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55514/.

Council of Science Editors:

Joyce, Jeanette 1. The artifact indicator project: three studies in the use of STEM classroom artifacts. [Doctoral Dissertation]. Rutgers University; 2017. Available from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55514/


Rutgers University

3. Rinehart, Ronald W., 1978-. Promoting students’ epistemic cognition and conceptual learning through the design of science learning environments.

Degree: PhD, Education, 2017, Rutgers University

When scientists develop knowledge about the world, they engage in a variety of complex epistemic processes (Allchin, 2011; Hardwig, 1985). They evaluate scientific models and evidence (Giere, 2004) and evaluate not only their own claims but the claims of others (Chinn, Rinehart, & Buckland, 2014) through the use of argumentation (Thagard, 2000). School science often omits the authentic epistemic practices of scientists, producing a false characterization of their work (Allchin, 2004; Chinn & Malhotra, 2002, Duschl, 1988). Science classrooms tend to be epistemically sterile environments (Goldberg, 2013) focused on unproblematic accounts of science (Allchin, 2004; Duschl, 1990). Recent calls for reform argue that there is a need for learning environment designs where students grapple with opposing perspectives and uncertainty like that found in the world outside of school (Britt, Richter, & Router, 2014). This research addresses these concerns in three parts. Chapter 2 presents a design case discussing four key design principles for engaging students with models and evidence in environments that embrace uncertainty and multiple, sometimes conflicting, perspectives. These decisions involve: identifying phenomena for students to investigate, designing for student engagement with modeling, developing evidence for use during modeling, and fostering productive disciplinary engagement (Engle & Conant, 2002). Chapter 3 examines how students use, evaluate, and re-evaluate evidence over time and how their ideas about one piece of evidence impact their ideas about other evidence. I present the results of a three-day model-based inquiry lesson with 7th grade students who investigated the possibility that some humans might be genetically resistant to HIV. Existing frameworks for evaluating student reasoning do not include evidence re-evaluation or the combination of pieces of evidence to construct a new body of evidence. I argue that normative accounts of good reasoning in science classes could be improved by taking both of these practices into account. Chapter 4 presents the results of a three-day modeling activity in which 7th grade life science students developed models of inheritance in response to multiple evidence sets. Students developed models that: were consistent with evidence, were internally consistent, increased in their use of causal mechanisms, and increased in their consistency with normative explanations of inheritance. Students’ abilities to correctly make predictions about novel inheritance problems significantly increased over time.

Advisors/Committee Members: Chinn, Clark A. (chair), Duncan, Ravit Golan (co-chair), Gitomer, Drew H. (internal member), Duschl, Richard A. (outside member), School of Graduate Studies.

Subjects/Keywords: Science – Study and teaching

Record DetailsSimilar RecordsGoogle PlusoneFacebookTwitterCiteULikeMendeleyreddit

APA · Chicago · MLA · Vancouver · CSE | Export to Zotero / EndNote / Reference Manager

APA (6th Edition):

Rinehart, Ronald W., 1. (2017). Promoting students’ epistemic cognition and conceptual learning through the design of science learning environments. (Doctoral Dissertation). Rutgers University. Retrieved from https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55669/

Chicago Manual of Style (16th Edition):

Rinehart, Ronald W., 1978-. “Promoting students’ epistemic cognition and conceptual learning through the design of science learning environments.” 2017. Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers University. Accessed September 18, 2019. https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55669/.

MLA Handbook (7th Edition):

Rinehart, Ronald W., 1978-. “Promoting students’ epistemic cognition and conceptual learning through the design of science learning environments.” 2017. Web. 18 Sep 2019.

Vancouver:

Rinehart, Ronald W. 1. Promoting students’ epistemic cognition and conceptual learning through the design of science learning environments. [Internet] [Doctoral dissertation]. Rutgers University; 2017. [cited 2019 Sep 18]. Available from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55669/.

Council of Science Editors:

Rinehart, Ronald W. 1. Promoting students’ epistemic cognition and conceptual learning through the design of science learning environments. [Doctoral Dissertation]. Rutgers University; 2017. Available from: https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/55669/

.