MEASURING TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS AS A RESULT OF INTENSIVE TRAINING IN THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF INSTRUCTION MODEL (MADELINE HUNTER, SUPERVISION, CLINICAL).

Abstract

Problem. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of elementary school teachers who had received intensive training in the Essential Elements of Instruction model, a teaching methodology composed of specific teacher behaviors. Teacher effectiveness was measured by analyzing student achievement results in reading. Procedure. Elementary teachers at specified grade levels in two selected school districts were divided into two groups: Group A, teachers who had received training in the Essential Elements of Instruction, and Group B, teachers who had not received this training. In School District I, a student population of approximately two hundred and twenty-five students was selected as the treatment group and a student population of approximately two hundred and ten students was selected as the control group. In School District II, a student population of approximately one hundred and forty-five students was selected as the treatment group and a student population of approximately one hundred and forty students was selected as the control group. The Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test (Form A-E) was used as the post test measure of achievement for all students. This test was used to determine if a teacher's training in the Essential Elements of Instruction model would result in greater student achievement gains as measured by the selected reading test. Results. The analysis of variance treatment of the data indicated that there were significant differences between the reading scores of students whose teachers had received training in the Essential Elements of Instruction model and those students whose teachers did not receive this training. Thus, the data did allow for the rejection of null Hypothesis 1. The analysis of variance treatment of the data indicated that there were no interaction effects of teacher training and student reading achievement by the grade level of the student, the socioeconomic level of the student, or the interaction of student grade level and student socioeconomic level. Thus, the data did not allow for the rejection of null Hypothesis 2, null Hypothesis 3 and null Hypothesis 4.