University Supervisor Training Austin Peay State University Fall 2012 Semester

University Supervisor Training

Austin Peay State UniversityFall 2012 Semester

Work with Mentor Teachers

Provide program information to the mentor teacher

– Clinical Teaching Handbook– Evaluation forms – Calendar – Explain about co-teaching and edTPA– Be positive and supportive

Work with Mentor Teachers

Conference with Mentor Teacher on a regular basis about the progress of the Teacher Candidate

What are the strengths?What are the weaknesses?Any concerns?

Conduct a summative conference with Mentor Teacher and Teacher Candidate

Seminars

NO seminars during the weeks of edTPA seminars on campus: September 10

September 24October 11

All seminars are required attendanceSuggest grade at end of placement:

A, B, C, D, F, or Incomplete

Suggested Seminar Topics1. Developing effective lesson plans2. Classroom management, discipline, and

motivation3. Livelong professional growth and development4. Parent-teacher relationships and communication5. Professional organizations6. Ethics, attitudes, and professional standards7. Effective use of technology8. Standards-based instruction9. Common Core10.Interview process11.Professionalism

Weekly Reflections

Submitted weekly to University Supervisor via email (determine deadline)

Should be professionally written - What happened?What was the response?What are the lessons learned?

Lesson Plans

CHECK LESSONS PLANS EVERY TIME YOU VISIT THE TEACHER CANDIDATE

Are they complete? (standards, assessments, etc)

Are they well-organized?Were they submitted on time?Do you have suggestions for improvement?

Unit plans are not required in either placement.

Summary Teacher Candidate Responsibilities

• Weekly Seminar attendance• Attendance at 5 school-related

meetings(reported to 2nd placement)

• edTPA (SPED – Milestone IV portfolio)• Weekly reflections• Daily lesson plans (no unit)

Evaluations

• 3 formative and 1 summative on teacher candidate

• Summative – attempt to fill in every blank

• Have a post-conference with Candidate • Evaluations and ALL paperwork due by

mid-semester seminar and final seminar– October 24 and December 7

Informal Evaluations

Informal evaluations –Conference with teacher candidate:

“How do you think the lesson went?”“What could you have done to improve the lesson?”“How could you have handled that situation differently?”“How are you preparing for tomorrow?”

Mileage

• Due by mid-semester and final seminar dates

• Call/email Theresa Dezellem if there are questions 931.221.7441 or [email protected]

Communication

• Daily conferences with teacher candidate– Positive reinforcement– Instruction– Suggestions– Model for your teacher candidate – let

them practice

Communication

• Mentor Teacher and Teacher Candidate

• Office of Clinical Teaching

• Be positive, but be honest– We want to help if there is a problem

Co-Teaching

Co-Teaching

is defined as two teachers (cooperating teacher and teacher candidate)

working together with groups of students - sharing the planning,

organization, delivery and assessment of instruction as well as

the physical space.Both teachers are actively involved and engaged

in all aspects of instruction

Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement

Grant

Why Co-Teach?

Reduce student/teacher ratio

Diversity and size of today’s classrooms

Enhance classroom management


Grant

Why Co-Teach?

Greater student participation and engagement

Increase instructional options for all students

Enhanced collaboration skills


Grant

Co-Teaching Findings


Grant

Type of Classroom Reading Proficiency

Co-Teaching Candidate

(N=318)

One Teacher (N=934)

Non Co-Teaching Candidate

(N=101)

0

20

40

60

80

10082.1

75.7

65.3

MCA Reading Proficiency2004-2005

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

Co-Teach-ing Can-didate

(N=484)

One Teacher (N=1597)


0

20

40

60

80

100

78.7 73.5

65

MCA Reading Proficiency2005-2006

Pe

rce

nt

of

Stu

de

nts

χ² (2 df, N=1353) = 12.79, p = .002 χ² (2 df, N=2241) = 12.54, p = 002


Grant

Type of ClassroomMath Proficiency

Co-Teach-ing Can-didate

(N=317)

One Teacher (N=927)

Non Co-Teaching Candidate (N=105)

0

20

40

60

80

10082.3

75.870.5

MCA Math Proficiency2004-2005

Pe

rce

nt

of

Stu

de

nts

Co-Teaching Candidate

(N=524)

One Teacher (N=1660)


(N=171)

0

20

40

60

80

100

68.964.7

57.9

MCA Math Proficiency2005-2006

Per

cen

t o

f S

tud

ents

χ² (2 df, N=1349) = 8.31, p=.016χ² (2 df, N=2355) = 7.35, p=.025


Grant

7-12 SurveyCumulative Data 2004-2008

(N=1,686)

No Benefits

More in-depth knowledge

Better discussions

More energy between teachers

Assignments graded & returned faster

More creative lessons

Teachers build off each other

Get 2 perspectives

More indiv attention

Different styles of teaching

More help with questions

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

4

43.1

45

46.1

50.9

51.2

60.3

65.8

66.4

68.9

79.7

Percent of Responses


Grant

Benefits To Teacher CandidatesEnd of Experience Survey

(N=157)

Teacher Candidates indicated that Co-Teaching led to:

Improved classroom management skills (95.5%)

Increased collaboration skills (94.9%)

More teaching time (94.6%)

Increased confidence (89.9%)

Deeper understanding of the curriculum through co-planning (89.1%)

More opportunities to ask questions and reflect (88.6%)


Grant

Benefits to Teacher CandidatesFocus Groups

(N=136)

Additional benefits of co-teaching:

Being seen as a “real” teacher

Equal partnership

Sharing resources

Mutual support and learning


Grant

Benefits to Cooperating TeachersEnd of Experience Survey

(N=279)

Cooperating Teachers indicate that Co-Teaching led to:Ability to reach more students, particularly those with

high needs (93.5%)

Better relationship with their teacher candidate (91%)

Experienced professional growth (89.2%)

Enhanced energy for teaching (87.8%)

Hosting a candidate without giving up my classroom (87.1%)

Teacher candidate had a better experience than they would have through with a traditional model (81.7%)


Grant

Benefits to Cooperating TeachersFocus Groups

(N=92)

Additional benefits of Co-Teaching:

Ability to do projects more successfully

Class time is more productive

Modeling and participating in teamwork

Candidates become competent more quickly


Grant

Creating an Environmentfor Co-Teaching


Grant

Co-Teaching Strategies/Approaches

• One Teach, One Observe• One Teach, One Assist• Station Teaching• Parallel Teaching• Supplemental Teaching• Alternative (Differentiated)

Teaching• Team Teaching Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,

Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

Co-Teaching is not simply dividing the tasks and responsibilities

between two people.

Co-Teaching is an attitude an attitude of sharing theclassroom and students

Co-Teachers must always be thinking

We’re Both Teaching!Copyright 2011, St. Cloud State University,

Research Funded by a US Department of Education, Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant

One Teach, One Observe

One teacher has primary instructional responsibility while the other gathers specific observational information on students or the (instructing) teacher.


Grant

One Teach, One Assist

One teacher has primary instructional responsibility while the other assists students’ with their work, monitors

behaviors, or corrects assignments.


Grant

Station Teaching

The co-teaching pair divide the instructional content into parts.

Each teacher instructs one ofthe groups, groups then rotateor spend a designated amount

of time at each station.


Grant

Parallel Teaching

In this approach, each teacher instructs half the students. The two teachers are

addressing the same instructional material using the same teaching

strategies.


Grant

Supplemental Teaching

This strategy allows one teacher to work with students at their expected grade level, while the other teacher works with those students who need

the information and/or materials extended or remediated.


Grant

Alternative or Differentiated

TeachingAlternative teaching strategies provide two different approaches to teaching the same information. The learning outcome is the same for all students

however the avenue for gettingthere is different.


Grant

Team TeachingWell planned, team taught lessons, exhibit

an invisible flow of instruction with no prescribed division of authority. Both teachers are actively involved in the

lesson. From a student’s perspective, there is no clearly defined leader, as both

teachers share the instruction, are free to interject information, and available to assist students and answer questions.


Grant

Hierarchy????

• Team Teaching• Alternative or Differentiated Teaching• Supplemental/Extended Teaching• Parallel Teaching• Station Teaching• One Teach, One Assist• One Teach, One Observe


Grant

Implementation

Team Teaching

Parallel Teaching

Station Teaching

OneTeach, OneAssist


Grant

Sharing Responsibilities

Cooperating

TeacherTeacherCandidat

e


Grant

Planning

TeachingAssessment

Sharing Planning

The Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher will share:

What content to teachWhat co-teaching strategies to useWho will lead different parts of the

lessonHow to assess student learningMaterials and resources


Grant

Sharing Instruction

While Co-Teaching, the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher will:

Share leadership in the classroom Work with all students Use a variety of co-teaching approaches Be seen as equal partners Manage the classroom together Make changes as needed during a lesson


Grant

Sharing Assessment

While Co-Assessing, the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher

will:

Both participate in the assessment of the students

Share the workload of daily gradingProvide formative and summative

assessment of studentsJointly determine grades


Grant

What does this look like…

Teacher Candidates will be expected to:

Contribute ideas from the very beginning of the experience

Engage with students assisting with their learning from the very first day

Be expected to take on full leadership in all 3 areas (planning, instruction & assessment)

Demonstrate competencies as a teacher Have opportunities to teach alone


Grant

Summing It up…

Co-Teaching requires the Teacher Candidate and Cooperating Teacher to build a strong relationship so they can

collaboratively plan, teach and assess the students in their classroom.

What are 3 things you can do to prepare for a teacher candidate?


Grant

edTPA

• Create a body of evidence of teacher performance (pre-service)

• Contribute evidence for licensure decisions

• Measure a candidate’s readiness for licensure

• Provide a consistent measure across teacher preparation programs

• Support candidate learning• Improve information base for

accreditation

Goals of edTPA

Pre-service assessments of teaching (for licensure, program requirements, etc.) should • allow us to predict reasonably well

how effective teachers will be in enabling students to learn important subject matter

• make teachers and teacher preparation better

Core Premise

Task 1 – What to do

• Contextual Context• Select learning segment• Select central focus and key language

demand• Create instruction and assessment plan• Respond to commentary prompts

Task 1 – What to submit

• Context for learning• Lesson plans

– instructional materials– assessment tools/procedures and

criteria

Planning Commentary


• Collect permission forms for video-recording

• Review lessons where students are engaged

• Submit 1-2 video clips • Respond to commentary prompts


• Video Clip• Instruction Commentary

Task 3 – what to do

• Analyze class performance• Identify 3 student work samples that

illustrate student understanding• Select and analyze the learning of 2

focus students• Respond to commentary prompts• Identify next steps

Task 3 – what to submit

• Student work samples• Evidence of feedback• Assessment commentary


• Explain what was learned by candidate

• What could be done differently• Explain how changes would improve

students’ learning


• Analyzing teaching commentary

Contact Information

• Lisa Barron, Coordinator of Clinical Teaching– Office phone 931.221.7190– Cell phone 615.519.0954– Email [email protected]

– Theresa Dezellem, Administrative AssistantOffice phone [email protected]

Documents

University Supervisor Training Austin Peay State University Fall 2012 Semester