Calls for evidence-based reform of teacher preparation programs (TPPs) suggest the question: Do the current indicators of progress and performance used by TPPs predict effectiveness of their graduates when they become teachers? In this study, the indicators of progress and performance used by one program are examined for their ability to predict value-added scores of program graduates. The study finds that rating instruments, including disposition surveys, clinical practice observation ratings, and portfolio assessments, each measure a single underlying dimension rather than the multiple constructs they were designed to measure. Neither these instruments nor teacher candidates’ scores on standardized exams predict their later effectiveness in the classroom based on value-added models of student achievement. Candidates’ grade point averages during their preparation program and number of math courses were positively associated with their students’ math score gains. These findings suggest a need for better instruments to measure prospective teachers’ progress toward proficiency.

This study investigates the effectiveness of a two-plus-two university center teacher education program. In this program, the entire curriculum is delivered on community college campuses; community college faculty members deliver the general education coursework, and university faculty members deliver coursework in the teacher education program area. A comparison of university center teacher education graduates with graduates who completed their programs on the university campus yielded no significant differences across several measures, including grades, assessments of dispositions, progress reports, and self-assessments of competence. The findings suggest that the university center model is a viable alternative to traditional, on-campus teacher education programs and may help address the teacher shortage-especially in rural areas-by reducing geographic and fiscal barriers to baccalaureate teacher education programs.