Cal Temp Services, Inc. Group 2A Elayne Concepcion Tania Garces Sarahy Pagan.
R EVISION OF I NITIAL AND C ONTINUED A PPROVAL S TANDARD G UIDELINES FOR INITIAL TEACHER PREPARATION...
-
Upload
tanner-hillen -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
2
Transcript of R EVISION OF I NITIAL AND C ONTINUED A PPROVAL S TANDARD G UIDELINES FOR INITIAL TEACHER PREPARATION...
REVISION OF INITIAL AND CONTINUED APPROVAL STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR INITIAL TEACHER PREPARATION
Elayne Colón, Tom Dana, & Theresa Vernetson
University of Florida
Project sponsored by the Florida Department of Education, Bureau of Educator Recruitment, Development & Retention
2
OUTLINE
Project Overview
Methods and Timeline
Findings
Recommendations and Implications
3
OVERVIEW OF PROJECT CHARGE
Prompted by recent legislation (SB 1664), Initial and Continued Program Approval Guidelines for Initial Teacher Preparation programs needed to be revisited.
Project included eliciting feedback and suggestions from ITP stakeholders concerning Program Approval Guidelines for ITP programs and making recommendations.
Duration of project: approximately 10 weeks during Summer 2013
4
PURPOSE
From SB 1664:
employ varied and innovative teacher preparation techniques while being held
accountable for producing program completers with the competencies and skills
necessary to achieve the state education goals; help all students in the state’s diverse student population meet high standards for
academic achievement; maintain safe, secure classroom learning environments; and
sustain the state system of school improvement and accountability
5
METHODS USED TO COLLECT STAKEHOLDER INPUT
conversation with Teacher and Leader Preparation and Implementation Committee (TLPIC)
web-based survey (51 respondents)
conversations with FLDOE staff throughout project
face-to-face meetings: Rollins College (5/17), FAU (5/22) (58 participants)
webinar (59 participants)
follow up with sample of stakeholders (14 solicited, 8 respondents)
6
TIMELINE OF EVENTS…
TLPIC Phone Conference (5/8/13)
Reactions to recent passage of SB 1664
Lessons learned from TLPIC work since March 2011
Recommendations from Site Visit Subcommittee (two-phase site visit process)
Relationship between Annual Program Performance Report Card and eIPEP
7
TIMELINE OF EVENTS CONTINUED… Web-based Survey
Available 5/7 – 5/28/13 51 respondents Questions focused on:
Extent to which stakeholder values particular data elements in making decisions about readiness of a program completer to enter the field
Extent to which stakeholder values particular data elements in making decisions about improving their ITP program
Extent to which stakeholder relies on data from FLDOE to improve their teacher preparation programs
8
TIMELINE OF EVENTS CONTINUED…
Face-to-Face Meetings
Rollins College – 5/17/13 Florida Atlantic University – 5/22/13 58 participants in all Discussions focused on:
Revisions to Continued Approval Guidelines Annual Reporting to the FLDOE Site Visit Process Initial Approval Guidelines
9
TIMELINE OF EVENTS CONTINUED…
Webinar
Held 6/14/13 59 participantsPresentation and discussion included:
key themes from F2F meetings regarding initial and continued approval
possible standards and indicators based on stakeholder input to that point
site visit processes and reporting for continued approval
10
FINDINGS: SURVEY
To what extent do you value this information in making decisions about readiness of a program completer to enter the field? Highest number of respondents reported
“Can’t do without it:” Candidate performance on all FEAPs/indicators during
culminating field experience (second demonstration) FTCE Subject Area Exam results Grades in subject specific education courses (e.g.
specialized methods) Performance on capstone measure (e.g. culminating
portfolio) Ability to differentiate instruction for students with
disabilities Ability to differentiate instruction for English language
students
11
FINDINGS: SURVEY
To what extent do you value this information in making decisions about improving your ITP program?Highest number of respondents reported
“Can’t do without it:” Candidate performance on all FEAPs/indicators
during culminating field experience (second demonstration)
FTCE Professional Education Exam results FTCE Subject Area Exam results Ability to differentiate instruction for students
with disabilities Ability to differentiate instruction for English
language students
12
FINDINGS: F2F AND WEBINAR
Continued Approval Standards Small Group Activity: examine current
standards/indicators and determine keep/remove/revise Majority Keep: Program faculty/school district personnel meet
state mandated requirements for supervision of field/clinical experiences (i.e., old 1.3 &1.4)
None had majority vote to remove entirely All others had majority vote to revise
Themes of Feedback: Consider different organizational structure for standards Separate compliance from continuous improvement … not helpful to continuous improvement, significant amount
of data is irrelevant to ITP program… (e.g., old 2.2) Focus on how programs use data to make changes Align with national accreditation (i.e., CAEP)
13
FINDINGS: F2F AND WEBINAR CONTINUED
Site Visits The standards should be the same for Initial and
Continued Program Approval. 58% YES
The application folios should be the same for institutions with other already-approved programs as for institutions with no approved programs. 86% NO
There should be an onsite visit for institutions with no other already-approved programs. 92% YES
14
15
KEY THEMES ACROSS STAKEHOLDER INPUT Focus on demonstration of program completer
competence and not candidate progress Attend to outcomes, not inputs Reduce reporting burden on programs whenever possible Streamline annual reporting requirements in the eIPEP
and site visit process for each approved program Separate compliance requirements from continuous
program improvement processes Allow innovation and creativity within institutions to learn
and promote best practices Support continuous improvement and avoid “gotcha”
mentality or need to find weaknesses in reviews Align Continued Program Approval processes with
national accrediting bodies (e.g., NCATE/CAEP, SACS) Align all documents and recommendations with SB 1664
16
RECOMMENDATIONS: STANDARDS
1. Program Administration and Candidate Selectivity
2. Program Completer Quality
3. Field/Clinical Practices
4. Program Effectiveness
1. Program Completer Quality
2. Field/Clinical Practices
3. Program Effectiveness
Initial Approval Continued Approval
17
RECOMMENDATIONS: SITE VISIT PROCESS
Two-phased* review:
Off-Site Phase On-Site Visit
*design based primarily on TLPIC Subcommittee’s recommendations
18
OFF-SITE PHASE OF REVIEW PROCESS
1. Site visit team reviews the institution’s program reports and electronic exhibits posted on line via the Electronic Institutional Program Evaluation Plan (eIPEP)
2. Off Site Reports for Each Program – team identify any “areas of concern” that could be cited as weaknesses in the final program approval recommendations
3. Preliminary findings shared with programs
4. In response to the off-site reports, the programs prepare addenda to their program reports, if necessary, and update their exhibits in the eIPEP as needed
19
ON-SITE VISIT AS PART OF REVIEW PROCESS
On-site Review Team members include a subset of the off-site review team, with the Team Chair remaining in that role for both reviews
On-site visit will span three days consisting of: Day 1 - Team meeting to set priorities and
participate in the institutional orientation Day 2 – Focus on (1) the “areas of concern”
identified during the off-site review, and (2) exemplars from select programs that highlight “continuous improvement.”
Day 3 – On-site review team meets to write final program report(s).
20
IMPLICATIONS AND WORK TO BE DONE
Revisions to eIPEP to integrate reporting features
Training and materials for program leaders preparing reports
Training and materials for reviewers to increase consistency
21