University Supervisor Training Austin Peay State University Fall 2012 Semester.
-
Upload
quentin-hodge -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
1
Transcript of University Supervisor Training Austin Peay State University Fall 2012 Semester.
University Supervisor Training
Austin Peay State UniversityFall 2012 Semester
Work with Mentor Teachers
Provide program information to the mentor teacher
– Clinical Teaching Handbook– Evaluation forms – Calendar – Explain about co-teaching and edTPA– Be positive and supportive
Work with Mentor Teachers
Conference with Mentor Teacher on a regular basis about the progress of the Teacher Candidate
What are the strengths?What are the weaknesses?Any concerns?
Conduct a summative conference with Mentor Teacher and Teacher Candidate
Seminars
NO seminars during the weeks of edTPA seminars on campus: September 10
September 24October 11
All seminars are required attendanceSuggest grade at end of placement:
A, B, C, D, F, or Incomplete
Suggested Seminar Topics1. Developing effective lesson plans2. Classroom management, discipline, and
motivation3. Livelong professional growth and development4. Parent-teacher relationships and communication5. Professional organizations6. Ethics, attitudes, and professional standards7. Effective use of technology8. Standards-based instruction9. Common Core10.Interview process11.Professionalism
Weekly Reflections
Submitted weekly to University Supervisor via email (determine deadline)
Should be professionally written - What happened?What was the response?What are the lessons learned?
Lesson Plans
CHECK LESSONS PLANS EVERY TIME YOU VISIT THE TEACHER CANDIDATE
Are they complete? (standards, assessments, etc)
Are they well-organized?Were they submitted on time?Do you have suggestions for improvement?
Unit plans are not required in either placement.
Summary Teacher Candidate Responsibilities
• Weekly Seminar attendance• Attendance at 5 school-related
meetings(reported to 2nd placement)
• edTPA (SPED – Milestone IV portfolio)• Weekly reflections• Daily lesson plans (no unit)
Evaluations
• 3 formative and 1 summative on teacher candidate
• Summative – attempt to fill in every blank
• Have a post-conference with Candidate • Evaluations and ALL paperwork due by
mid-semester seminar and final seminar– October 24 and December 7
Informal Evaluations
Informal evaluations –Conference with teacher candidate:
“How do you think the lesson went?”“What could you have done to improve the lesson?”“How could you have handled that situation differently?”“How are you preparing for tomorrow?”
Mileage
• Due by mid-semester and final seminar dates
• Call/email Theresa Dezellem if there are questions 931.221.7441 or [email protected]
Communication
• Daily conferences with teacher candidate– Positive reinforcement– Instruction– Suggestions– Model for your teacher candidate – let
them practice
Communication
• Mentor Teacher and Teacher Candidate
• Office of Clinical Teaching
• Be positive, but be honest– We want to help if there is a problem
Co-Teaching
Co-Teaching
is defined as two teachers (cooperating teacher and teacher candidate)
working together with groups of students - sharing the planning,
organization, delivery and assessment of instruction as well as
the physical space.Both teachers are actively involved and engaged
in all aspects of instruction
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Why Co-Teach?
Reduce student/teacher ratio
Diversity and size of today’s classrooms
Enhance classroom management
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Why Co-Teach?
Greater student participation and engagement
Increase instructional options for all students
Enhanced collaboration skills
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Co-Teaching Findings
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Type of Classroom Reading Proficiency
Co-Teaching Candidate
(N=318)
One Teacher (N=934)
Non Co-Teaching Candidate
(N=101)
0
20
40
60
80
10082.1
75.7
65.3
MCA Reading Proficiency2004-2005
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
Co-Teach-ing Can-didate
(N=484)
One Teacher (N=1597)
Non Co-Teaching Candidate
0
20
40
60
80
100
78.7 73.5
65
MCA Reading Proficiency2005-2006
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
χ² (2 df, N=1353) = 12.79, p = .002 χ² (2 df, N=2241) = 12.54, p = 002
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Type of ClassroomMath Proficiency
Co-Teach-ing Can-didate
(N=317)
One Teacher (N=927)
Non Co-Teaching Candidate (N=105)
0
20
40
60
80
10082.3
75.870.5
MCA Math Proficiency2004-2005
Pe
rce
nt
of
Stu
de
nts
Co-Teaching Candidate
(N=524)
One Teacher (N=1660)
Non Co-Teaching Candidate
(N=171)
0
20
40
60
80
100
68.964.7
57.9
MCA Math Proficiency2005-2006
Per
cen
t o
f S
tud
ents
χ² (2 df, N=1349) = 8.31, p=.016χ² (2 df, N=2355) = 7.35, p=.025
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
7-12 SurveyCumulative Data 2004-2008
(N=1,686)
No Benefits
More in-depth knowledge
Better discussions
More energy between teachers
Assignments graded & returned faster
More creative lessons
Teachers build off each other
Get 2 perspectives
More indiv attention
Different styles of teaching
More help with questions
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
4
43.1
45
46.1
50.9
51.2
60.3
65.8
66.4
68.9
79.7
Percent of Responses
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Benefits To Teacher CandidatesEnd of Experience Survey
(N=157)
Teacher Candidates indicated that Co-Teaching led to:
Improved classroom management skills (95.5%)
Increased collaboration skills (94.9%)
More teaching time (94.6%)
Increased confidence (89.9%)
Deeper understanding of the curriculum through co-planning (89.1%)
More opportunities to ask questions and reflect (88.6%)
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Benefits to Teacher CandidatesFocus Groups
(N=136)
Additional benefits of co-teaching:
Being seen as a “real” teacher
Equal partnership
Sharing resources
Mutual support and learning
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Benefits to Cooperating TeachersEnd of Experience Survey
(N=279)
Cooperating Teachers indicate that Co-Teaching led to:Ability to reach more students, particularly those with
high needs (93.5%)
Better relationship with their teacher candidate (91%)
Experienced professional growth (89.2%)
Enhanced energy for teaching (87.8%)
Hosting a candidate without giving up my classroom (87.1%)
Teacher candidate had a better experience than they would have through with a traditional model (81.7%)
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Benefits to Cooperating TeachersFocus Groups
(N=92)
Additional benefits of Co-Teaching:
Ability to do projects more successfully
Class time is more productive
Modeling and participating in teamwork
Candidates become competent more quickly
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Creating an Environmentfor Co-Teaching
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Co-Teaching Strategies/Approaches
• One Teach, One Observe• One Teach, One Assist• Station Teaching• Parallel Teaching• Supplemental Teaching• Alternative (Differentiated)
Teaching• Team Teaching Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
Co-Teaching is not simply dividing the tasks and responsibilities
between two people.
Co-Teaching is an attitude an attitude of sharing theclassroom and students
Co-Teachers must always be thinking
We’re Both Teaching!Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,
Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant
One Teach, One Observe
One teacher has primary instructional responsibility while the other gathers specific observational information on students or the (instructing) teacher.
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
One Teach, One Assist
One teacher has primary instructional responsibility while the other assists students’ with their work, monitors
behaviors, or corrects assignments.
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Station Teaching
The co-teaching pair divide the instructional content into parts.
Each teacher instructs one ofthe groups, groups then rotateor spend a designated amount
of time at each station.
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Parallel Teaching
In this approach, each teacher instructs half the students. The two teachers are
addressing the same instructional material using the same teaching
strategies.
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Supplemental Teaching
This strategy allows one teacher to work with students at their expected grade level, while the other teacher works with those students who need
the information and/or materials extended or remediated.
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Alternative or Differentiated
TeachingAlternative teaching strategies provide two different approaches to teaching the same information. The learning outcome is the same for all students
however the avenue for gettingthere is different.
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Team TeachingWell planned, team taught lessons, exhibit
an invisible flow of instruction with no prescribed division of authority. Both teachers are actively involved in the
lesson. From a student’s perspective, there is no clearly defined leader, as both
teachers share the instruction, are free to interject information, and available to assist students and answer questions.
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Hierarchy????
• Team Teaching• Alternative or Differentiated Teaching• Supplemental/Extended Teaching• Parallel Teaching• Station Teaching• One Teach, One Assist• One Teach, One Observe
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Implementation
Team Teaching
Parallel Teaching
Station Teaching
OneTeach, OneAssist
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Sharing Responsibilities
Cooperating
TeacherTeacherCandidat
e
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Planning
TeachingAssessment
Sharing Planning
The Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher will share:
What content to teachWhat co-teaching strategies to useWho will lead different parts of the
lessonHow to assess student learningMaterials and resources
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Sharing Instruction
While Co-Teaching, the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher will:
Share leadership in the classroom Work with all students Use a variety of co-teaching approaches Be seen as equal partners Manage the classroom together Make changes as needed during a lesson
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Sharing Assessment
While Co-Assessing, the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher
will:
Both participate in the assessment of the students
Share the workload of daily gradingProvide formative and summative
assessment of studentsJointly determine grades
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
What does this look like…
Teacher Candidates will be expected to:
Contribute ideas from the very beginning of the experience
Engage with students assisting with their learning from the very first day
Be expected to take on full leadership in all 3 areas (planning, instruction & assessment)
Demonstrate competencies as a teacher Have opportunities to teach alone
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
Summing It up…
Co-Teaching requires the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher to build a strong relationship so they can
collaboratively plan, teach and assess the students in their classroom.
What are 3 things you can do to prepare for a teacher candidate?
Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement
Grant
edTPA
• Create a body of evidence of teacher performance (pre-service)
• Contribute evidence for licensure decisions
• Measure a candidate’s readiness for licensure
• Provide a consistent measure across teacher preparation programs
• Support candidate learning• Improve information base for
accreditation
Goals of edTPA
Pre-service assessments of teaching (for licensure, program requirements, etc.) should • allow us to predict reasonably well
how effective teachers will be in enabling students to learn important subject matter
• make teachers and teacher preparation better
Core Premise
Task 1 – What to do
• Contextual Context• Select learning segment• Select central focus and key language
demand• Create instruction and assessment plan• Respond to commentary prompts
Task 1 – What to submit
• Context for learning• Lesson plans
– instructional materials– assessment tools/procedures and
criteria
Planning Commentary
Task 2 – What to do
• Collect permission forms for video-recording
• Review lessons where students are engaged
• Submit 1-2 video clips • Respond to commentary prompts
Task 2 – What to submit
• Video Clip• Instruction Commentary
Task 3 – what to do
• Analyze class performance• Identify 3 student work samples that
illustrate student understanding• Select and analyze the learning of 2
focus students• Respond to commentary prompts• Identify next steps
Task 3 – what to submit
• Student work samples• Evidence of feedback• Assessment commentary
Task 4 – What to do
• Explain what was learned by candidate
• What could be done differently• Explain how changes would improve
students’ learning
Task 4 – What to submit
• Analyzing teaching commentary
Contact Information
• Lisa Barron, Coordinator of Clinical Teaching– Office phone 931.221.7190– Cell phone 615.519.0954– Email [email protected]
– Theresa Dezellem, Administrative AssistantOffice phone [email protected]