View in EDS

The Classical Psychometric Method of Evaluation of FTPP.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Classical Psychometric Method of Evaluation of FTPP.
Authors: Waller, Michael, Soltz, Donald, Chicago Univ., IL. Ford Training and Placement Program.
Peer Reviewed: N
Page Count: 17
Publication Date: 1973
Descriptors: Beginning Teachers, College School Cooperation, Competence, Evaluation Methods, Performance Criteria, Program Evaluation, Psychometrics, Teacher Education, Teacher Education Programs, Teacher Improvement, Teacher Selection
Abstract: Data collected from one high school was evaluated to exemplify how the psychometric method was applied to the Ford Training and Placement Program (FTPP). Evaluation of the FTPP relied on both affective, paper-and-pencil measures and classroom observations. It was the concern of this investigation to discover differences between Ford and non-Ford subjects. An analysis of convariance design, with pretest scores covaried out, revealed few significant differences in posttest scores. A difference in three personality measures seemed to support the validity of the teacher selection process. The lack of other differences between Ford and non-Ford individuals may not reflect shortcomings on the program so much as the inappropriateness of the measures used. A tighter connection between program and evaluation would have made an adequate summative evaluation possible. (Author/JA)
Entry Date: 1974
Accession Number: ED081768
Database: ERIC
Description
Abstract:Data collected from one high school was evaluated to exemplify how the psychometric method was applied to the Ford Training and Placement Program (FTPP). Evaluation of the FTPP relied on both affective, paper-and-pencil measures and classroom observations. It was the concern of this investigation to discover differences between Ford and non-Ford subjects. An analysis of convariance design, with pretest scores covaried out, revealed few significant differences in posttest scores. A difference in three personality measures seemed to support the validity of the teacher selection process. The lack of other differences between Ford and non-Ford individuals may not reflect shortcomings on the program so much as the inappropriateness of the measures used. A tighter connection between program and evaluation would have made an adequate summative evaluation possible. (Author/JA)