PASBO Professional Registration Program The Past, The Present, The Future

The Past Formed in 1984 Program Guide (Manual) PRSBA PRSBO PRSBS

Application Requirements Issues raised Registrant Renewal New Candidates Application Requirements Program Restructure

The Survey A tremendous response A great cross-section Registrants Non-Registrants Superintendents

Most of the outcomes expected as a result of registration were achieved by at least half of those expecting them: recognition by employers - 87.8% showing support for PASBO - 80.4% recognition by peers - 78.8% gaining pride or personal satisfaction - 78.2% meeting employer expectation or requirements - 70.2% increasing credibility in educational community - 65.1% increasing marketability - 56.9%

Only 20% of registrants indicated that registration was included in their job descriptions, either as a preference (15.1%) or requirement (5.4%).

PRSBSs realized significantly fewer outcomes than expected compared to PRSBAs and PRSBOs in four categories: gaining pride and personal satisfaction increasing marketability meeting employer expectations or requirements obtaining increased compensation or benefits

73.3% indicated that their employers pay the full registration fee Fees covered by employers – this is very positive! 73.3% indicated that their employers pay the full registration fee   97.3% expressed satisfaction with the current registration program 92.4% of PRSBAs, 93.7% of PRSBOs, and 100% of PRSBSs indicated plans to renew registration

58.2% of members not currently registered indicated they did not have plans to obtain registration in the next three years   53.9% of the members who indicated they did not have plans to obtain registration stated it was because their employer does not require registration and 44.6% stated it was because they did not perceive a value of registration

Of the 78.4% of survey respondents who indicated their employers pay the registration fee, over half still indicated having no interest in applying for the registration.   Just over 8% of members not currently registered indicated that the registration was included in their job description and Just 11% of chief school administrators indicated that they included registration in their job descriptions It’s a value problem! Even when they don’t have to pay for it, they aren’t applying.

87. 0% of members not currently registered and 81 87.0% of members not currently registered and 81.4% of chief school administrators indicated they were aware of professional registration prior to receiving the survey   78.4% indicated that their employers pay for the registration fee

88.4% of chief school administrators stated that they provided some type of encouragement or reward for their staff to become professionally registered   Over half of the chief school administrators stated they perceived the benefits of PASBO professional registration to their institution to include provision of credibility within the educational community (71.3%), and making it easier to discern qualifications of potential employees (50.1%)

Focus on employers as a key target Consider what changes could be made to the program to make it more valuable to employers Employers stated that staff professional development would be the key value in any redesign of the registration program

Application Requirements Registrant respondents agreement: - PASBO membership (87.9%) - work experience (86.4%) - chief school administrator verification (77.6%) - formal education (62.5%) Non-registrant respondents agreement - PASBO membership (78.2%) - work experience (75.6%) - chief school administrator verification (47.1%) - formal education (36.1%)

Application Requirements – Continuing Education Registrant CEUs in the specialty area (67.8%) Specific PASBO courses in the specialty area (51.9.%) CEUs - content not specified (44.7%) Non-Registrant CEUs in the specialty area (40.5%) Specific PASBO courses in the specialty area (33.3%) CEUs - content not specified (24.4%)

Accept years of experience equivalent to formal education requirement Accept additional types of CE – those for which travel is unnecessary and cost is limited Reconsider some types of CE currently accepted CE for survey completion

97.3% of registrants are satisfied with the current program 92.4% PRSBAs, 93.7% PRSBOs, and 100% of PRSBSs plan to renew Yet 68.3% want some type of restructure…

79.6% PRSBSs want restructure 58.7% PRSBOs want restructure 70.4% PRSBAs want restructure… yet 61% want their own registration to remain the same (only 8.7% of PRSBAs want the PRSBA to be restructured)

Specialty areas of most interest: 66.4% chief school administrators indicated they would find valuable a restructure indicating specialties or job functions Specialty areas of most interest: Business administration, human resources, facilities, purchasing, transportation, safety, payroll

The program is NOT in eminent danger of losing viability in its current state A majority of respondents indicated favoring a restructure (although not to the PRSBA program)

Restructure Options Maintain current registrations and add specialty designations Maintain current PRSBA and replace PRSBO and PRSBA with specific job functions Maintain the PRSBA and add specialty designations to PRSBO and PRSBS

Option: Maintain current PRSBA and replace PRSBO and PRSBA with job functions The smaller the population holding a registration, the more difficult it is to get it recognized Possible detriment to individuals working in many areas (not specialized) Possible detriment to individuals wanting to move into a new area

Option: Maintain current registrations and add optional specialties to them (to all or to just PRSBO and PRSBS) Benefits: 81.4% of chief school administrators are are of current registrations Majority of registrants expressed satisfaction with current system and plan to renew

The Direction we are heading – We would like your input and reaction The Future The Direction we are heading – We would like your input and reaction

Options Keeping things the same Curriculum-based Certificate “alphabet” soup

The Case for Curriculum-based Certificates Compared to continuing education: Focused on outcomes / measurable results Comprehensive, integrated

Develop Course Assessment Course Competencies / Learning Objectives Course Content Course Assessment

Development Steps 1. Determine Goals 2. Identify Course Competencies / Learning Objectives 3. Determine Program Design and Delivery Vehicles 4. Create Course Content 5. Develop Course Assessments

Job Analysis Steps Collect as much data as possible about the “job” Convene experts to draft the functional areas and competencies of the “job” Validate the draft with a larger sample

Offer optional specialty curriculum-based certificates Comprehensive training program on a focused topic for which participants receive a certificate upon completion of the coursework and successful demonstration of attaining the course learning objectives

Offer optional add-on or modular registrations Time-limited specialty area registration awarded to a registered individual after verifying that he or she has met predetermined and standardized criteria in a specialty area

Advantages Disadvantage   Advantages Disadvantage Curriculum-based Certificate  Meets chief staff administrator stated desire for training / professional development of staff as a value-added component of registration Assessment component is competency-based -- making it look closer to certification (but less expensive) Typically has a higher value and meaning to members and employers Can provide registrants with a valuable resume builder – verifying their knowledge/skill in specialty areas Higher cost to both association and members The resulting initial designation add-ons to the base registration could result in unwieldy “alphabet soup” (PRSBS-CA,P,FS) Add-on or Modular Registration Lower cost to both association and members Model similar to existing so candidates would be familiar and comfortable with it The resulting initial designation add-ons to the base registration could result in unwieldy “alphabet soup” (PRSBS-CA,P,FS)

Program Design Self-assessments Case Studies Exercises Readings Lectures Panels Workshops Applied Project Pre-tests Quizzes Post-tests

CDR Program Design Pre-workshop self-study on fundamentals (readings and exercises, mostly case-based) Pre-test to qualify to attend the onsite workshop 2 1/2 day onsite workshop with both didactic and experiential elements Post-workshop offsite assessment Limit to 150 participants to allow experiential component

Delivery Vehicle Options Face to face Online - synchronous, asynchronous Audioconference Webinars CD-ROM Audiotapes / videotapes Printed publications / self-study workbooks Blended

CDR Delivery Vehicles Self-study: spiral bound booklet mailed Pre-test: mailed with self-study, taken online or sent in by fax Course: face-to-face workshop Post-test: provided onsite, completed at-home, submitted online or by fax

Conclusions / Future Directions

Questions?