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

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

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

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

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

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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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.

11. 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

12. 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%)

13. 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

14. 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%)

15. 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%)

16. 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

17. 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…

18. 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)

19. 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

20. 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)

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

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

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

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

28. 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

29. 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

30. 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

31. 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

32. 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)

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

35. 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

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

37. 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

38. Conclusions /
Future Directions

39. Questions?