Educator Preparation Advisory Council (EPAC)

1

Educator Preparation Advisory Council (EPAC)

September, 2013

2

Agenda

Welcome, EPAC Updates & Purpose for Webinar

CCSSO Report & NTEP Grant Overview

NTEP/EPAC Implementation Plan

Next Steps

3


EPAC Framework Updates

Purpose of Today’s Webinar

CSDE Update

4

Agenda




Next Steps

5

CCSSO Report & NTEP Grant Overview: Our Responsibility, Our Promise

Recommendations on Licensure

1. States will revise and enforce their licensure standards for teachers and principals to support the teaching of more demanding content aligned to college- and career-readiness and critical thinking skills to a diverse range of students. 2. States will work together to influence the development of innovative licensure performance assessments that are aligned to the revised licensure standards and include multiple measures of educators’ ability to perform, including the potential to impact student achievement and growth. 3. States will create multi-tiered licensure systems aligned to a coherent developmental continuum that reflects new performance expectations for educators and their implementation in the learning environment and to assessments that are linked to evidence of student achievement and growth. 4. States will reform current state licensure systems so they are more efficient, have true reciprocity across states, and so that their credentialing structures support effective teaching and leading toward student college- and career-readiness.

Aligned EPAC Principles1. Program Entry Standards5. Program Completion & Candidate Assessment Standards

6


Recommendations on Program Approval

5. States will hold preparation programs accountable by exercising the state’s authority to determine which programs should operate and recommend candidates for licensure in the state, including establishing a clear and fair performance rating system to guide continuous improvement. States will act to close programs that continually receive the lowest rating and will provide incentives for programs whose ratings indicate exemplary performance.

6. States will adopt and implement rigorous program approval standards to assure that educator preparation programs recruit candidates based on supply and demand data, have highly selective admissions and exit criteria including mastery of content, provide high quality clinical practice throughout a candidate’s preparation that includes experiences with the responsibilities of a school year from beginning to end, and that produce quality candidates capable of positively impacting student achievement.

7. States will require alignment of preparation content standards to PK-12 college- and career-ready standards for all licensure areas.

8. States will provide feedback, data, support, and resources to preparation programs to assist them with continuous improvement and to act on any program approval or national accreditation recommendations.

Aligned EPAC Principles6. Program Effectiveness & Accountability 3. Staffing & Support of Clinical Experiences5. District-Program Partnerships: Structures & Shared Responsibility

7


Recommendations on Data Collection, Analysis & Reporting

9. States will develop and support state-level governance structures to guide confidential and secure data collection, analysis, and reporting of PK-20 data and how it informs educator preparation programs, hiring practices, and professional learning. Using stakeholder input, states will address and take appropriate action, individually and collectively, on the need for unique educator identifiers, links to non-traditional preparation providers, and the sharing of candidate data among organizations and across states.

10. States will use data collection, analysis, and reporting of multiple measures for continuous improvement and accountability of preparation programs.

Aligned EPAC Principles1. Program Entry Standards 6. Program Effectiveness & Accountability5. District-Program Partnerships: Structures & Shared Responsibility

8

CCSSO Report & NTEP Grant Overview: NTEP Grant

Selection Criteria

The state’s commitment to implement the ten recommendations in Our Responsibility, Our Promise over at least the next two years (15 points)

The demonstrated readiness of the state to implement the recommendations (25 points)

The demonstrated political will to make policy changes needed to ensure that teacher and leader candidates are prepared to enter classrooms and schools ready to prepare all students to graduate college and career ready (20 points)

The demonstrated willingness to work collectively with other states to address problems of practice such as performance assessments, reciprocity/mobility, data sharing across states, etc. (15 points)

The commitment of the state agency to devote senior staff time to participating in the activities of the pilot project (10 points)

A strategy to ensure stakeholder input and support (15 points)

Participating StatesConnecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, & Washington

Partners, Resources & Commitment

9

Agenda




Next Steps

10

CCSSO Report & NTEP Grant Overview: NTEP Work

Portland Convening of States

CSDE Work on Implementation Plan

NTEP & EPAC Workgroups and 2013-2014 Plan

11

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Licensure

CCSSO Recommendations

States will revise and enforce their licensure standards for teachers and principals to support the teaching of more demanding content aligned to college- and career-readiness and critical thinking skills to a diverse range of students.

States will work together to influence the development of innovative licensure performance assessments that are aligned to the revised licensure standards and include multiple measures of educators’ ability to perform, including the potential to impact student achievement and growth.

States will create multi-tiered licensure systems aligned to a coherent developmental continuum that reflects new performance expectations for educators and their implementation in the learning environment and to assessments that are linked to evidence of student achievement and growth.

States will reform current state licensure systems so they are more efficient, have true reciprocity across states, and so that their credentialing structures support effective teaching and leading toward student college- and career-readiness.

EPAC Principles

Program Entry Standards: Connecticut teacher preparation programs must actively recruit, admit, develop and retain only those teacher candidates with strong knowledge, skills, dispositions that are indicative of those expected of teachers for the 21st Century and required to meet the needs of Connecticut students.

Program Completion & Candidate Assessment Standards: Candidates will demonstrate competencies aligned with national and state standards by successfully completing rigorous performance-based assessments as part of clinical experiences. All teacher candidates will demonstrate dispositions and skills necessary to support students’ academic and non-academic needs.

12

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Licensure

Licensure Goals

Long-term goals: Certification regulations will be reviewed and revised aligned with EPAC principles.

Changes to licensure are not a focus for the State of Connecticut during the first year of the NTEP grant.

13

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Program ApprovalCCSSO Recommendations

States will hold preparation programs accountable by exercising the state’s authority to determine which programs should operate and recommend candidates for licensure in the state, including establishing a clear and fair performance rating system to guide continuous improvement. States will act to close programs that continually receive the lowest rating and will provide incentives for programs whose ratings indicate exemplary performance.

States will adopt and implement rigorous program approval standards to assure that educator preparation programs recruit candidates based on supply and demand data, have highly selective admissions and exit criteria including mastery of content, provide high quality clinical practice throughout a candidate’s preparation that includes experiences with the responsibilities of a school year from beginning to end, and that produce quality candidates capable of positively impacting student achievement.

States will require alignment of preparation content standards to PK-12 college- and career-ready standards for all licensure areas.

States will provide feedback, data, support, and resources to preparation programs to assist them with continuous improvement and to act on any program approval or national accreditation recommendations.

EPAC Principles

Program Effectiveness & AccountabilityPreparing a teacher to be successful and effective in the field is the shared responsibility of preparation program and partner districts. Preparation programs must ultimately be responsible for ensuring completers enter the profession with the skills, knowledge and dispositions to be effective in the classroom. Preparation programs must have access to data about their completers’ performance in the classroom and should be held accountable for their programs’ effectiveness in preparing teachers to enter and remain in the profession.

Staffing & Support of Clinical ExperiencesThe staffing, structures and program support policies of preparation programs, school districts and CSDE must be coordinated to provide effective clinical experiences that represent the current and future needs of Connecticut’s schools and children. Clinical faculty (supervisors) and school based educators have a significant impact on candidate clinical experiences and must be effective educators who understand and apply national and state teaching and student standards.

District-Program PartnershipsTeacher preparation programs and schools/districts must have well-defined, high-quality, collaborative partnerships to ensure the quality of clinical experiences for teacher candidates while addressing the needs of and benefits to all involved. Teacher preparation programs and school districts will develop strategic partnerships to support clinical and school-based training for which they share responsibility, authority, and accountability including program development and implementation

14

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Program Approval

Program Approval Goals

Long-term goals: Develop new, more rigorous program approval process and regulations to guide approval decisions by the State Board of Education (SBE) based on review of efficacy of curriculum, as well as accountability data on a program’s measures of quality.

15

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Program Approval

Milestones & Measures of Success

6 Month

• Conduct review and identify recommendations for revisions to the program approval process, including how state approval schedule will be aligned with NCATE/CAEP.

• Program approval process must clarify relationship between state approval mandate and optional NCATE/CAEP accreditation.

12 Month

• Develop accountability framework and measures of quality and link it with program approval process.

• Begin formal revisions to program approval regulations.• With EPAC consensus, begin development of specific instruments (e.g., clinical experience

evaluation instruments, feedback surveys, etc.) required as part of EPAC principle 6 and accountability system measures of quality.

18 Month

• Finalize accountability framework and program approval regulations. Develop budget to support improvement.

• Draft revised program approval regulations and coordinate with CSDE Office of Legal Affairs for review of technical sufficiency.

• Pilot specific instruments measuring candidate performance and related training.

24 Month

• Complete draft of proposed program approval regulations for presentation to the SBE for approval.

• Implement specific instruments measuring candidate performance and related training and integrate resulting data in the accountability system.

16

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Data Collection, Analysis & ReportingCCSSO Recommendations

States will develop and support state-level governance structures to guide confidential and secure data collection, analysis, and reporting of PK-20 data and how it informs educator preparation programs, hiring practices, and professional learning. Using stakeholder input, states will address and take appropriate action, individually and collectively, on the need for unique educator identifiers, links to non-traditional preparation providers, and the sharing of candidate data among organizations and across states.

States will use data collection, analysis, and reporting of multiple measures for continuous improvement and accountability of preparation programs.

EPAC Principles

Program Entry Standards: Connecticut teacher preparation programs must actively recruit, admit, develop and retain only those teacher candidates with strong knowledge, skills, dispositions that are indicative of those expected of teachers for the 21st Century and required to meet the needs of Connecticut students.

Program Effectiveness & AccountabilityPreparing a teacher to be successful and effective in the field is the shared responsibility of preparation program and partner districts. Preparation programs must ultimately be responsible for ensuring completers enter the profession with the skills, knowledge and dispositions to be effective in the classroom. Preparation programs must have access to data about their completers’ performance in the classroom and should be held accountable for their programs’ effectiveness in preparing teachers to enter and remain in the profession.

District-Program Partnerships: Structures & Shared ResponsibilityTeacher preparation programs and schools/districts must have well-defined, high-quality, collaborative partnerships to ensure the quality of clinical experiences for teacher candidates while addressing the needs of and benefits to all involved. Teacher preparation programs and school districts will develop strategic partnerships to support clinical and school-based training for which they share responsibility, authority, and accountability including program development and implementation

17

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Collection & Use of Data

Collection & Use of Data Goals

Long-term goals: Develop new data collection, analysis and reporting system to ensure accountability in the system for program approval and institutional reporting of performance measures, as well as provide biennial research data on supply and demand.

18

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Collection & Use of Data

Milestones & Measures of Success

6 Month

• Complete draft plan for data system for accountability performance measures and institutional reports.

12 Month

• Obtain consensus from EPAC on draft accountability system plan and present to SBE.

19

EPAC & NTEP Implementation Plan: Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder Engagement Goals

Long-term goals: Maintain an active dialog with a broad base of stakeholders to provide regular updates and to solicit diverse input and strategic collaboration on each element of the work. By actively engaging stakeholders through ongoing communications and meetings, we will achieve broad support at all levels for the work of CSDE and EPAC including the work undertaken by EPAC and in furtherance of CSDE’s participation in NTEP.

20

Agenda




Next Steps

21

Next Steps for CSDE & EPAC

EPAC School Leader Framework State Board October 2

EPACAppointment of new members to fill vacanciesDecember Meeting of full EPACEPAC sub-groups

CCSSO/NTEPSubmission of Implementation Plan with MOAFuture MeetingsPartner Resources

Documents

Educator Preparation Advisory Council (EPAC)