March 1, 2004

ITTF_CLEX_PT04.pdf

This report compares findings from the End of Training surveys administered to Participant Teachers (PTs) who took part in the Classic version of Intel Teach to the Future and who took part in the Expansion version of Intel Teach to the Future. Classic survey data were collected between March 2001 and July 2003. PT Expansion survey data were collected between April 2002 and March 2004. The comparison of data from these two surveys shows strong commonalities as well as differences between these two groups of teachers. In many cases the two groups were so similar that any differences were found to be not statistically significant. Unless otherwise noted, all of the findings presented in this report are statistically significant. It is important to bear in mind, however, that the formula for determining statistical significance is based in part on the size of the sample. Because the sample sizes for the data reported here are quite large, the reader should use caution when interpreting the meaning of statistically significant but otherwise small differences between the two groups. The frequencies for the Classic and Expansion PT End of Training survey data can be found in Appendix A.

METHODS
Subjects. All teachers who participated in the Classic or Expansion training were expected to complete an End of Training survey at the end of their training. In addition, all teachers participating in the Classic training were required to complete an application prior to the training experience. The total number of valid survey responses was 59,129, with 49,329 participants included in the Classic PT training and 9,800 participants included in the Expansion PT training, unless otherwise indicated. The substantial differences in sample sizes between the Expansion and Classic participants suggest that far fewer Expansion participants completed the End of Training surveys. It is important to keep these sample size discrepancies in mind while interpreting the comparisons between the results of these surveys. Pearson Chi-Square tests were used to determine the statistical significance of findings across both Participant Teacher groups.

No application data were collected for teachers participating in the Expansion Participant Teacher training until August 2003, and these demographic surveys were not administered in the same way that the End of Training surveys were administered. The PT demographic surveys were pop-up forms that appeared when participants clicked on the button to access the End of Training survey on the Intel Teach to the Future web site. Participant Teachers could choose to fill out, but were not required to do so. Because the information requested was optional, only small numbers of Expansion participants responded to the questions in this survey (N=2,367). Unlike the Master Teacher Expansion application data, the demographic data collected from Expansion PTs in this manner could not be linked to the End of Training surveys. Therefore, it is impossible to determine if the small group of teachers who completed the demographic surveys are included among or are representative of teachers who completed the End of Training survey.

Instruments. The survey was developed by CCT in consultation with ICT and Intel staff who had been involved in the development of the curriculum. Minor revisions were made to the survey in Spring 2001.

Procedures. Surveys were administered via the World Wide Web. Specifically, the surveys were mounted within an extranet maintained by Intel for Intel Teach to the Future participants. Classic participants were asked to complete the application prior to their participation. All teachers were asked to complete the End of Training survey at the conclusion of their training. The data reported here from the Classic Intel Teach to the Future training were collected between March 2001 and July 2003. The data reported here from the Expansion Intel Teach to the Future training were collected between April 2002 and March 2004.