The oncolytic activity of Newcastle Disease Virus, NDV-HUJ, on ...
ndv Jan AIMS-Data Coach
4
All Middle Schools District-wide 459 For the 2008-09 School Year, the Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) and the Albuquerque Teachers Federation (ATF) agreed to evaluate the continued pilot model of professional development/in-service days begun the previous year – three days of district-wide professional development and one day of teacher preparation for all A-schedule employees (those providing services to students). As part of this evaluation, these individualized reports are provided to trainers so they have information that may help modify and improve their sessions. January, 2009 District Professional Development Satisfaction Survey For the January 2009 training, school training focused on AIMS in the morning and Data Coach in the afternoon. A total of 459 middle school personnel completed the survey, for a response rate of approximately 35%. Comments among all participants district-wide were largely negative due especially to the lack of data within the AIMS and Data Coach systems and the lack of sufficient opportunity to practice during the training. Future desired professional development topics for middle school personnel include: specialized training for particular teacher groups (e.g. EA's, PE and Special Education teachers), teacher collaboration, further AIMS training, curricular mapping, graphing software, subject area training, time management, TIENET, site-created PD, and time to work in one's own classroom. Among all middle school staff district-wide, most reported AIMS training to be useful (about 80%) and well presented (about 70%). However, there seems to be room for improvement; by about a 2 to 1 margin, most respondents "agreed" rather than "strongly agreed" with positive statements related to AIMS. Not surprisingly, only about 15% of middle school personnel report any familiarity with AIMS before the training, compared to about 78% after the training - though most report only a "medium" level of understanding after the training. Comments as well as a lower response rate suggest many middle school staff did not receive Data Coach training. Of those that did, most reported Data Coach training to be useful (about 77%) and well presented (about 70%). Again, most respondents "agreed" rather than "strongly agreed" with positive statements related to Data Coach, this time by about a 3 to 1 margin. About 30% of middle school personnel report any familiarity with Data Coach before the training, compared to about 78% after the training. And again, most report only a "medium" level of understanding after the training. Number of surveys: 87% 1% 8% 3%1% Teacher Administration Support role (including teachers) EA Instrucional Coach APS/RDA/NBC/04-09 1
Transcript of ndv Jan AIMS-Data Coach
All Middle Schools District-wide
459
For the 2008-09 School Year, the Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) and the Albuquerque Teachers Federation (ATF) agreed to evaluate the continued pilot model of professional development/in-service days begun the previous year – three days of district-wide professional development and one day of teacher preparation for all A-schedule employees (those providing services to students). As part of this evaluation, these individualized reports are provided to trainers so they have information that may help modify and improve their sessions.
January, 2009District Professional Development Satisfaction Survey
For the January 2009 training, school training focused on AIMS in the morning and Data Coach in the afternoon. A total of 459 middle school personnel completed the survey, for a response rate of approximately 35%.
Comments among all participants district-wide were largely negative due especially to the lack of data within the AIMS and Data Coach systems and the lack of sufficient opportunity to practice during the training.
Future desired professional development topics for middle school personnel include: specialized training for particular teacher groups (e.g. EA's, PE and Special Education teachers), teacher collaboration, further AIMS training, curricular mapping, graphing software, subject area training, time management, TIENET, site-created PD, and time to work in one's own classroom.
Among all middle school staff district-wide, most reported AIMS training to be useful (about 80%) and well presented (about 70%). However, there seems to be room for improvement; by about a 2 to 1 margin, most respondents "agreed" rather than "strongly agreed" with positive statements related to AIMS. Not surprisingly, only about 15% of middle school personnel report any familiarity with AIMS before the training, compared to about 78% after the training - though most report only a "medium" level of understanding after the training. Comments as well as a lower response rate suggest many middle school staff did not receive Data Coach training. Of those that did, most reported Data Coach training to be useful (about 77%) and well presented (about 70%). Again, most respondents "agreed" rather than "strongly agreed" with positive statements related to Data Coach, this time by about a 3 to 1 margin. About 30% of middle school personnel report any familiarity with Data Coach before the training, compared to about 78% after the training. And again, most report only a "medium" level of understanding after the training.
Number of surveys:
87%
1%8%
3%1%Teacher
Administration
Support role (includingteachers)
EA
Instrucional Coach
APS/RDA/NBC/04-09 1
All Middle Schools District-wide459
Thinking about the AIMS training, how would you rate the usefulness of the course material?
Thinking about the Data Coach training, how would you rate the usefulness of the course material?
District Professional Development Satisfaction SurveyJanuary, 2009
Number of surveys:
27 26 22 21 18 2855 68 65 61 53 50 55
245 248 239 246 252 249 240
131 113 124 125 127 137 128
250%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
The
obj
ectiv
esw
ere
appl
icab
leto
my
wor
k.
The
ses
sion
supp
orte
d m
yw
ork.
The
mat
eria
l/in
form
atio
n w
asus
eful
.
The
info
rmat
ion
was
rel
evan
t.
The
info
mra
tion
was
unde
rsta
ndab
le.
The
con
tent
was
pres
ente
d in
an
unde
rsta
ndab
lese
quen
ce.
I will
use
the
info
rmat
ion
Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree
31 28 26 24 20 2845 65 65 58 50 50 55
216 200 201 209 219 221 207
72 66 65 69 70 72 69
300%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
The
obj
ectiv
esw
ere
appl
icab
leto
my
wor
k.
The
ses
sion
supp
orte
d m
yw
ork.
The
mat
eria
l/in
form
atio
n w
asus
eful
.
The
info
rmat
ion
was
rel
evan
t.
The
info
mra
tion
was
unde
rsta
ndab
le.
The
con
tent
was
pres
ente
d in
an
unde
rsta
ndab
lese
quen
ce.
I will
use
the
info
rmat
ion
Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree
APS/RDA/NBC/04-09 2
Please think about the teaching strategies used during the Date Coach training to answer the following questions.
Please think about the teaching strategies used during the AIMS training to answer the following questions.
49 37 46
83103 89 74
225208 226 228
109 92 104 106
380%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Were youprofessionally
engaged?
Was the professionaldevelopment
differentiated for youas an adult learner?
Was the group sizeconducive to your
learning?
Was the venueconducive to your
learning?
Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree
39 32 35
77 8764 51
200 184208 208
57 53 57 63
310%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Were youprofessionally
engaged?
Was the professionaldevelopment
differentiated for youas an adult learner?
Was the group sizeconducive to your
learning?
Was the venueconducive to your
learning?
Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree
APS/RDA/NBC/04-09 3
Regarding the AIMS training, how would you rate your:
Regarding the AIMS training, how would you rate your:
Regarding the Data Coach training, how would you rate your:
89
355
110
371
126
373
88
364
286
72
278
54
266
60
236
597114
6116
5811
125
21
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Now Before thepresentation
Now Before thepresentation
Now Before thepresentation
Now Before thepresentation
level of knowledge of theinformatation presented?
ability to discuss theinformation with a
colleague?
ability to apply theinformation in the short
term?
ability to apply theinformation in the long
term?
Low Medium High
95
246
112
256
115
258
94
255
195
74
191
68
189
60
195
6765
33 55 29 48 2868
29
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Now
Bef
ore
the
pres
enta
tion
Now
Bef
ore
the
pres
enta
tion
Now
Bef
ore
the
pres
enta
tion
Now
Bef
ore
the
pres
enta
tion
level of knowledge of theinformatation presented?
ability to discuss theinformation with a
colleague?
ability to apply theinformation in the short
term?
ability to apply theinformation in the long
term?
Low Medium High
APS/RDA/NBC/04-09 4
