1. September 13, 2011 CCSSO State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness (SCEE) Going Deeper into the Preparation of Teachers

2. Webinar Logistics  Everyone is muted  Use the chat function to make a comment or ask a question  You may chat privately with individuals or to everyone on the webinar  If you have problems, you may send William Bentgen a message via the chat function or an email at williamb@ccsso.org 2

3. 3

4. Panelists  Irv Richardson, InTASC Committee Member and Coordinator for Public Education and School Support NEA-New Hampshire  James G. Cibulka, President, NCATE/CAEP  Beverly Young, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Academic Affairs, California State University  Tom Bordenkircher, Associate Vice Chancellor, Office of Academic Quality & Assurance, Ohio Board of Regents 4

5. Impetus for Today’s Topic  Blue Ribbon Panel report discussed during the preparation strand at SCEE summit  Focus on educator quality has led to inquiry into the preparation of teachers  Desire to increase the role of clinical practice during preparation  Desire for appropriate accountability 5

6. James G. Cibulka President NCATE/CAEP Transforming Educator Preparation: The Blue Ribbon Panel Recommendations and Policymakers’ Key Role

7. Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation, Partnerships, and Improved Student Learning  Response to concerns that preparation is disconnected from practice  Recommendation to “turn educator preparation upside down”  Higher education and state leadership on Panel symbolic  Recommendations for joint P-12/higher ed responsibility and accountability for preparation 7

8. 10 Design Principles Implications for organizational changes in education preparation Examples:  P-12 student learning is the focus  Clinical preparation is integrated throughout every facet...in a dynamic way  Strategic partnerships are imperative for powerful clinical preparation 8

9. More Rigorous Accountability  Changes in accreditation and state standards:  Set clear goals for quality and effectiveness  Implement rigorous monitoring and enforcement  Connect candidate performance, preparation, and program approval to student learning 9

10. More Rigorous Accountability  All programs must meet same standards  Accountability closer to the classroom 10

11. Selection and Placement  Selection  Increase rigor and diversity in admissions  NRC research guide  Placement:  Help facilitate school of ed coordination with low performing schools where available  Place cadres of student teachers/interns vs. sole individual 11

12. Revamping Curriculum, Incentives, and Staffing  Will require leadership of Chiefs; SHEEOs; chancellors; presidents──through new policies: Curriculum  Wrap coursework around clinical experiences  Examine state policies on clinical preparation 12

13. Revamping Curriculum, Incentives, and Staffing Incentives  Change incentives for school of education faculty Staffing  Develop new staffing models, especially to assist low-performing schools. 13

14. Support Partnerships for New Model of Educator Preparation  Roles for SHEEOs, Chancellors, Presidents, Provosts, and Chiefs  Remove barriers to collaboration between higher education and P-12  Provide incentives to meet district needs  Shared approach vs. silos; investigate fused/joint funding  Partnerships must serve school needs 14

15. Expand the Knowledge Base  Chiefs and SHEEOs: Develop joint/shared state plan to move toward new model of education preparation  Share Blue Ribbon Panel recommendations with administrators and school districts  Encourage development and pilot testing of prototypes  Encourage Transformation Initiatives 15

16. Beverly Young, Ph.D. Assistant Vice Chancellor, Academic Affairs California State University System The California Alliance for Teacher Education Partnerships

17. California Alliance: Motivation As the largest preparer of new teachers in the state and nation, CSU’s motivation was:  Prepare 21 st century teachers  Address school district priorities  Improve P-12 student learning 17

18. California Alliance: Leadership Two state leaders and Blue Ribbon Panel members head the Alliance:  Charles B. Reed, Chancellor, California State University System  Christopher J. Steinhauser, Superintendent, Long Beach Unified School District 18

19. California Alliance: Building Foundation The central initial efforts were:  CSU Summit on Transformative Change in Teacher Preparation -- February, 2011  Planning group from nationally recognized Long Beach Education Partnership 19

20. California Alliance: Statewide Launch The statewide launch this month included:  Invitation to 100+ universities, 1,000+ school districts, 30+ policymakers and stakeholders  Establishment of Alliance website: www.calstate.edu/teachered/Ca-Alliance www.calstate.edu/teachered/Ca-Alliance 20

21. California Alliance: Five Areas of Focus  Admissions criteria  Clinical partnerships  Candidate placement  Alternative induction  Outcomes-based evaluation 21

22. California Alliance: Funding Received Over $1.55 million of external funding from:  S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation  James Irvine Foundation  David and Lucile Packard Foundation  Workforce Investment Act 22

23. California Alliance: Next Steps  Provide consultation to partnerships  Identify and disseminate effective practices  Foster collaboration and sharing among members  Host Alliance Summit in late spring 2012 23

24. Tom Bordenkircher Associate Vice Chancellor Associate Vice Chancellor Office of Academic Quality & Assurance with the Ohio Board Regents Office of Academic Quality & Assurance with the Ohio Board Regents Implementing Reforms in Ohio

25. Ohio’s Reform Overview  Began with HB1, July 2009  New Accountability Metrics Developed  Areas on Metrics include: partnerships, curriculum, hard-to-staff schools, etc.  Working with Blue Ribbon committee on issues of placement and clinical practice 25

26. Teacher Preparation Quality Measurements Minimum Standards Every teacher preparation program in Ohio will report on the success of each graduate on the following measurements: Whether the graduate passed the state licensure exam The performance of the graduate on the Teacher Performance Assessment The value-added growth metric (as determined by the Ohio Department of Education) The Chancellor will work with higher education leaders to determine minimum scores for the teacher performance assessment and the value-added growth metric. Minimum scores for state licensure exams are determined by the Ohio State Board of Education. Programs will be required to meet the minimum scores to maintain the authorization to offer teacher preparation programs in Ohio. Minimum Standards Every teacher preparation program in Ohio will report on the success of each graduate on the following measurements: Whether the graduate passed the state licensure exam The performance of the graduate on the Teacher Performance Assessment The value-added growth metric (as determined by the Ohio Department of Education) The Chancellor will work with higher education leaders to determine minimum scores for the teacher performance assessment and the value-added growth metric. Minimum scores for state licensure exams are determined by the Ohio State Board of Education. Programs will be required to meet the minimum scores to maintain the authorization to offer teacher preparation programs in Ohio. 26

27. Teacher Preparation Quality Measurements Excellence and Innovation Additional recognition will be given to institutions that demonstrate commitment and success in the following areas: Placement of graduates in hard-to-staff schools in urban and rural settings (both public and private) Quality of partnerships with all P-12 schools (public and private) Partnerships to improve the performance of low performing schools Education students gaining international experiences Use of innovative technologies for instruction Other initiatives determined by the Chancellor4 (STEMM partnerships, Woodrow Wilson Fellowship, etc.) Excellence and Innovation Additional recognition will be given to institutions that demonstrate commitment and success in the following areas: Placement of graduates in hard-to-staff schools in urban and rural settings (both public and private) Quality of partnerships with all P-12 schools (public and private) Partnerships to improve the performance of low performing schools Education students gaining international experiences Use of innovative technologies for instruction Other initiatives determined by the Chancellor4 (STEMM partnerships, Woodrow Wilson Fellowship, etc.) 27

28. Teacher Preparation Quality Measurements Continuous Improvement In order to gauge the continuing progress of efforts to raise the quality of entering teacher candidates, student teaching experiences, and alignment with employer needs, each school will report on: The quality of candidates entering and continuing through teacher preparation programs The quality of field and clinical experiences The satisfaction of teachers with the quality of their preparation program Performance surveys from mentors and employers Percent of newly hired teachers completing the state residency program5 National accreditation Other initiatives determined by the Chancellor Continuous Improvement In order to gauge the continuing progress of efforts to raise the quality of entering teacher candidates, student teaching experiences, and alignment with employer needs, each school will report on: The quality of candidates entering and continuing through teacher preparation programs The quality of field and clinical experiences The satisfaction of teachers with the quality of their preparation program Performance surveys from mentors and employers Percent of newly hired teachers completing the state residency program5 National accreditation Other initiatives determined by the Chancellor 28

29. Teacher Preparation Quality Measurements 29

30. Poll 30

31. Poll Which of the following teacher preparation topics would you like addressed in future SCEE webinars? ( all that apply, live webinar responses in red) a)The 10 Design Principles for teacher education programs (48%) b)Designing and implementing accountability systems for teacher preparation programs (81%) c)Strategies for selecting teacher candidates and mentor teachers (52%) d)Strategies for revamping teacher preparation curriculum (52%) e)Strategies for strengthening partnerships for teacher preparation (56%) 31

32. Preparation Discussion Group  Join the Preparation Discussion Group  http://scee.groupsite.com/page/preparation http://scee.groupsite.com/page/preparation  On the Collaboration Site Home Page select PreparationHome Page  If you are not already a member, request an invitation 32

33. Upcoming Webinars Regular SCEE webinars occur the second Tuesday of each month at 2:00 pm ET. The following webinars have unusual dates due to the upcoming Topical Meeting and the USED release of NCLB waivers:  Informing SCEE Members about the NCLB Waiver Process: To be announced  Leader Evaluation: Oct. 4 th at 2:00 pm ET 33

34. 30 Minute Q&A  The audio portion of the webinar has concluded  Experts will be available for 30 minutes to respond to your questions  Enter your questions in the Chat space  We will post the Q&A on the webinars page at the conclusion of this event  http://scee.groupsite.com/page/webinars http://scee.groupsite.com/page/webinars 34

35. The chat Q&A will be posted on the SCEE Collaboration site: www.ccsso.org/scee Please complete the webinar evaluation that you will receive by email Thank You!