1. Preparation Program Accountability EPSB Retreat July 15, 2013 Terry Hibpshman Martin School for Public Policy and Administration University of Kentucky 1 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

2. 2 Inference Expert Judgment Based on multiple sources of information Derived from noisy and incomplete sources So that decisions are nonmonotonic Applying bright lines only where appropriate (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

3. Influences Product-oriented accountability trends Post-Sanders perceptions of teacher effects Title II of the Higher Education Act The Elementary and Secondary Education Act – NCLB Race to the top KDE PGES CAEP proposed program quality standards EPSB Goals and Themes 3 And of course, the ubiquitous NCTQ (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

4. EPSB Goals Goal 1: Every approved educator preparation program meets or exceeds all accreditation standards and prepares knowledgeable, capable teachers and administrators who demonstrate effectiveness in helping all students reach educational achievement. Goal 2: Every professional position in a Kentucky public school is staffed by a properly credentialed educator. Goal 3: Every credentialed educator exemplifies behaviors that maintain the dignity and integrity of the profession by adhering to established law and EPSB Code of Ethics. Goal 4: Every credentialed educator participates in a high quality induction into the profession and approved educational advancement programs that support effectiveness in helping all students achieve. Goal 5: The EPSB shall be managed for both effectiveness and efficiency, fully complying with all statutes, regulations and established federal, state, and agency policies. 4 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

5. EPSB Themes  Diversity (with specific attention to exceptional children including the gifted and talented, cultural and ethnic diversity)  Assessment (developing skills to assess student learning)  Literacy/Reading  Closing the Achievement Gap (identify what courses emphasize strategies for closing the gap) I would suggest there are others Awareness of local conditions Productivity 5 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

6. How do we know when we’ve succeeded? EPSB Goals are operationalized by strategies Goal 4: Every credentialed educator participates in a high quality induction into the profession and approved educational advancement programs that support effectiveness in helping all students achieve. Strategy 4.1. Develop and utilize reliable measures of teacher effectiveness and student achievement that may be used in evaluation of induction and professional advancement activities. 6 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

7. Strategies are operationalized by measurements Proposed Measurement Item 25: Mean performance score on internship performance record Which requires a valid, reliable, and sensitive intern performance measurement methodology And there might be additional measures Teacher effectiveness Student achievement 7 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

8. General Accountability Approach Horizontal accountability Coordinated with KDE Incorporates federal requirements Eventually incorporate CAEP stadards Sensitive to conditions of practice Segmented teacher labor market School and district characteristics Weighted by year post-completion Addresses matters within the control of preparation programs Differentiates between poor judgment and lack of capacity Measures are practice-relevant Consequences administered within a “just culture” framework Incentives and technical assistance to help programs develop effective internal accountability systems Subject to ongoing review and revision 8 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

9. Consequences Reporting Technical assistance Program review Sanctions Identification as a poorly-performing program Limitations on the program’s privileges Decertification And an escalation component 9 SlideSlide 12

10. Implementation  Create scales for the reporting of existing methods, such as accreditation processes  Identify additional elements for the dashboard, and develop display formats  Develop methods for creating the disaggregated values using SGP data  Develop generalized statistical procedures for analysis of longitudinal data  Develop procedures for review and revision of the accountability model  Develop a yearly program progress report format  Develop inference guidelines, train staff 10 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

11. Examples Production Effectiveness Completions Praxis 11 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

12. Questions/Comments 12 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

13. 13 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

14. Reporting YearNumber of Headings 20028 20038 20048 20058 20068 20078 20088 20097 201025 201126 HEA Title II State Annual Report Number of Report Headings 2002-2011 And the rules keep changing... 14 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

15. College-Level Coursework: Maximum=87 points Must be documented by official college transcript and specific to the teaching assignment listed above. Must be coursework in core content – i.e., not pedagogy. May be coursework taken prior to or after initial certification. 3 points per credit hour earned Teaching Experience: Maximum=45 points Must be in the teaching assignment and in an accredited school 3 points per year Professional Development: Maximum=45 points Must be consistent with the definition of “high quality professional development” delineated in Section 9101 of NCLB 5 points per documented activity during the past 10 years Achievements/Awards: Maximum=35 points Must be specific to the teaching assignment listed above (e.g., department chair; cooperating teacher for student teacher; KTIP resource teacher; documented student learning as demonstrated via state/ national test scores; teaching awards). 5 points per documented activity during the past 10 years Source: Kentucky Educational Professional Standards Board; Identifying Highly Qualified TeachersIdentifying Highly Qualified Teachers Kentucky HOUSSE Scoring Protocol 15 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

16. Designing and implementing rigorous standards and high-quality assessments. Attracting and keeping great teachers and leaders in America’s classrooms Supporting data systems that inform decisions and improve instruction Using innovation and effective approaches to turn-around struggling schools Demonstrating and sustaining education reform Race to the Top Reforms 16 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

17. 17

18. Proposed CAEP Accountability Standards Content and pedagogical knowledge Clinical partnerships and practice Candidate quality, recruitment and selectivity Program impact Provider quality, continuous improvement, and capacity In addition, a CAEP data acquisition and reporting mechanism to monitor the quality of teacher education programs nationally 18 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

19. Program Completers by Content Area Southern State University Content area Completers 2008 Completers 2009 Completers 2010 Completers 2011 Completers 2012 Completers 2013 Completers 2014 Completers 2015 Elementary Education6261656359585659 Middle School Mathematics2028252117151715 Middle School Science18 171518212219 Middle School Social Studies2827312926283229 Middle School Language Arts3130323537394142 Music101291110 129 Art859118797 Physical Education2522211920212019 Chemistry65674687 Physics01000201 Biology1518*121516171418 English3028323431303233 An example - Production 19 (Simulated) (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

20. 20 (Simulated) (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

21. TPP/School accountability attribution by practice year Practice YearTPP componentSchool component 1100%0% 280%20% 360%40% 4 60% 520%80% 6 or more0%100% 21 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

22. 22 (Real historical data)

23. This is a relatively small, rural, nonpublic institution 23 (Real historical data) (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

24. This is a relatively large, rural, public institution 24 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

25. This is a medium-sized, rural, nonpublic institution 25 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

26. This is a small, urban, nonpublic institution 26 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

27. 27 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

28. 28 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

29. 29 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

30. 30 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

31. 31 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board

32. 32 (c) 2013 Education Professional Standards Board