ASSESSING CANDIDATE PERFORMANCE William Sharpton Richard Hall University of New Orleans Project Directors’ Meeting July 2007

Context Shift to a performance-based model of teacher preparation Increased accountability for PK-12 and higher education systems OSEP personnel preparation project in low incidence disabilities (significant disabilities)

Shift in Preparation Model From linear Recruitment Preparation Placement Induction Retention To concurrent

Our Goal Collaborate with PK-12 school partners and other stakeholders to extend knowledge and skills learned in preparation program into teaching practices

Key Program Components Coursework Divided into three levels Field work Organized within job-embedded format Candidate assessment Alignment with national and state standards Shift from “collection” of work to sustainable model of performance review

Assessment Issues Levels (depth) Standards based Multiple perspectives Alignment with induction needs Shift from university (short term) to candidate/district (long term) use of model Adoption of reflection model that improves practice

Levels Initial – focus on student impact and candidate professional development Intermediate – focus on student impact, classroom operation and candidate professional development Advanced – focus on student impact, classroom operation, campus/district impact and candidate professional development

Standards Based National Council for Exceptional Children (NCTAE SPA) National Board (Advanced level) State La Components of Effective Teaching Competencies for teachers serving students with significant disabilities

Multiple Perspectives Reviews involve four parties University Faculty Cohort Leader (Masters level teacher) Building administrator Family member (supported by grant) University is the “short term” partner

Induction Needs Reorganization of coursework to focus on “layers” rather than specific topic Design of field activities to match needs of classroom Field activities include required and elective options Elective activities are selected based on assessment of student/classroom/campus needs

Shift to Candidate Use of Model Initial review – almost all artifacts in portfolio can result from assigned field activities Intermediate review – 75% of artifacts can result from assigned field activities Advanced review – A maximum of 50% of artifacts can result from assigned field activities

Reflection Model Role focused Roles used in cohort groups to: Determine progress to date in terms of teaching Identify next steps to take Initial level field activities support engagement in small number of roles Advanced field activities require engagement in 5-6 roles to product desired outcome(s)

Teacher Roles Design and deliver instruction Manage time, tasks, & environments Collaborate to support group practice Advocate for children, services, & supports Use inquiry to inform practice Improve classroom & system practice