Using Missouri’s Annual Performance Report for Continuous Improvement in Educator Preparation Gale “Hap” Hairston Director – Educator Preparation David L. Hough Dean – College of Education Missouri State University, Springfield

TeachersCounselorsLibrarians Building Leaders Missouri Educator Evaluation System Seven Essential Practices of Effective Evaluation Educator Preparation Programs (APR-EPP) Field & Clinical Experiences Certification Requirements Superintendents Missouri Standards & Quality Indicators with Professional Continuum PK-12 Schools Professional Practice & Learning

Missouri Context  54 Approved EPPs  13 Community College (AAT)  41 Four Year EPPs 13 State Programs 28 Private Programs  CAEP & SPA Accreditation – Voluntary  26 Programs (12 State; 14 Private)

MoSTEP – September 1999 Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs Data Points in a 7 Year Review Cycle – Grade Point Averages – Curricular Alignment – Faculty & Supervisors – College Base Scores – Praxis II Scores – Surveys – 1st Year Teachers & Principals

The Challenge & Our Journey Began in Fall 2010 – Build a Coherent & Cohesive Model for Continuous Improvement for ALL Educators – Involved PK-12, EPPs, & Professional Associations

MoSTEP to MoSPE Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs – Sept Unit Standards Teaching Standards Aligned with INTASC 7 Year Review Cycle Missouri Standards for the Preparation of Educators – Nov Unit Standards Teaching Standards Aligned with InTASC Replaced 7 Year Review Cycle with an Annual Performance Report

Data Points – MoSTEP to MoSPE MoSTEP 7 Year Review Cycle Data Points – Grade Point Averages – Curricular Alignment – Faculty & Supervisors – College Base Scores – Praxis II Scores – Surveys – 1 st Year Teachers & Principals MoSPE Annual Performance Report Current Data Points – GPA – Middle/Secondary – Praxis II and/or Missouri Content Assessments – Surveys – 1 st Year Teachers & Principals

Key – Regional Meetings  How do you measure the effectiveness of your educator preparation program?  3 Outcomes  State Builds Data System  Common Assessments  All providers held to the same standards!

Annual Performance Report Standard #1 – Academics – 1.1 – Certification Assessments Praxis II Ended August 2014 Missouri Content Assessments Start September 2014 – 1.2 – Content/Certification Program GPA Middle School Secondary School Standard #4 – Candidate – 1 st Year Teachers – 1.1 – First Year Teachers Survey – 1.2 – First Year Teachers Survey – By Principals

Annual Performance Report Standard #3 – Field & Clinical Experiences – Indicator #1 – Performance Assessments MoPTA – Teachers – Implemented in Fall 2015 – Data Included in the APR – Academic Year MoSLPA – Building Principals – Implemented in Fall 2014 – Data Included in the APR – Academic Year MoSCPA & MoLPA – School Counselors & Librarians – Implemented in Fall 2015 – Data Included in the APR – Academic Year

Annual Performance Report Standard #3 – Field & Clinical Experiences – Indicator #2 – Missouri Educator Evaluation System – Results – 16 Standards & Quality Indicators Identified by 120+ School Districts Ratings Gathered From – Cooperating Teachers (16 – SQI) – EPP Supervisors (16 – SQI) – Building Principals (4 – SQI) Training Provided By DESE-OEQ – Observation Skills – Feedback

Communication Plan – Technical & Supporting Data Reports – Compared EPP Data Points to State Averages – Individual EPP Conferences – Webinars & Individual EPP Conferences – MoTAC Meetings (Assessment Directors) – Draft Report to State Board of Education

Communication Plan & – APR to EPPs for Review & Possible Appeals – Release to Individual EPPs – “Internal” Release to ALL EPPs for Review – Publicly Reported in February – Publicly Reported in February 2018 – With Decisions – Mets & Not Mets

APR Comprehensive Guide Relates APR to MoSPE Calculations & Decisions Rules for Continued Approval Phase in New Indicators – Content Assessments – Performance Assessments – Missouri Educator Evaluation System

Report Format – Program Summary Performance AssessmentsEducator Evaluation System 15

Continuous Improvement Topics of Discussion – Use 2 Levels of Technical Advisory Committees – Small Cell Sizes & Use of Certification Clusters Currently Using N=30 Discussing Cell Sizes N=10 – Transition of Assessments – Fidelity of Data Points – Connections to Student Growth & Achievement – Possible Index of Variables – Other Measures?

Continuous Improvement Watching with Anticipation – Sharing the Vision & Methodology – Defining the Role of the Assessment Director – Varying Resources – Time & Personnel – Communicating Information Responsibility & Accountability All EPPs Including Arts & Sciences – Political – National & State Contexts – Redesign of Educator Preparation

Engaging Stakeholders Missouri Advisory Council for Certification of Educadtors (MACCE) Missouri Association of Colleges of Teacher Education (MACTE is an affiliate of AACTE) Missouri Council of Education Deans (formed in fall 2012) Missouri Advisory Board for Educator Preparation (MABEP – est. 2013, per HB5)

Moving Forward Joint meetings of the State Board of Education & the Coordinating Board for Higher Education Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) Network for Transforming Educator Preparation (NTEP) PK-12 – University Partnerships Bringing all stakeholders together

Evaluation? High need areas: math, physics, chemistry, foreign languages, special education.... Diversity & Educator “Pipeline” Relationship of GPA, MoGEA, MEP, MoCA, MoPTA to teaching and learning “Learner Ready Day One” Relationship of MEES to student learning – What is the role of higher education?

Contact Information David L. Hough – Dean, College of Education – Missouri State University – 901 S. National Avenue – Hill Hall 304 – Springfield, Missouri – – –

Contact Information Gale “Hap” Hairston – Director – Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education – Office of Educator Quality – Post Office Box 480 – Jefferson City, MO – – – Website: